DOA5U The Official Tier List with Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Crext
- Start date
Maybe they don't know how to nerf him.
Rapham0n
Active Member
From reading some of the posts here it is clear that some people have no idea what tier lists are or how they work. Anybody who gets upset about the posting of tier lists has no real idea what tier lists are about. I for one only look at tier lists because I find it interesting to see how characters are rated. In most games my characters are usually low to bottom tier characters, and that doesn't bother me in the least because I enjoy using those characters.
Here is a detailed explanation of what a tier list is and how it works. (The layout might look a little strange because this is taken from a text file. It is based on the video game TEKKEN TAG TOURNAMENT 2 for the PS3 and Xbox 360, but it applies to all games. The information is taken from multiple sources across the web.):
WARNING! WALL OF TEXT TO FOLLOW!
"Tiers:
In layman's terms a tier list is a list where all the characters in the game are ranked from best to worst. It is determined by how good a character is in the game. The tier list shows you how good each character is when he/she/it is taken to their full potential. In other words the tier list shows you how good the character is when you know absolutely everything about the character and can do everything of the character with no trouble at all and never make any mistakes during matches. Again, a tier list is a list that shows you how good a character is when that character is taken to their maximum potential.
A "tier" is a term used commonly within fighting game circles and tournaments to describe a character's general success in tournaments and common battles of the fighting game from which they hail. In some cases the general structure of the tiers for a particular game are agreed upon by the player community, with only slight variation. With other games, the tiers may be the subject of fierce debate with strongly differing viewpoints. By their nature, tiers cannot be regarded as pure fact, but ideally come about from educated opinions and thoughtful observations supported by evidence as tournament results.
Tiers are not limited to characters in fighting games. The concept of tiers may be applied to all other games in which players are allowed to choose from characters, weapons, strategies, etc. Tiers may be used to describe how effectively these choices accomplish the general goal of the particular game. It can be argued that as it is very unlikely that a game is perfectly balanced, particularly complex modern video games, that all games have tiers to an extent. Those who abide by this thinking believe there are methods or choices that are inherently more efficient or more effective than others. Just as in First Person Shooters certain guns are more efficient than others at taking out your enemies; and in racing games certain cars are more efficient at winning races. Fighting games are similar in that certain characters are more efficient at beating opponents.
The concept and controversy around tiers is mostly limited to competitive fighting games, as their arcade and home console roots make them much less likely to be patched. That is, if the creator realizes that they made a mistake in designing a character who is too powerful, it is difficult to fix. This leads to characters and tactics which can seem very radical and overpowering to a third party, especially a gamer not familiar with the fighting game genre.
Examples:
Although it differs from game to game, the usual formation of the tier listing in fighting games goes like this:
-Broken Characters:
Although not always used in tier listing, once in a while a character or characters in a fighting game are given such an overwhelming advantage, that they are considered "broken". Such characters may be labelled as being "God Tier." The main priority in a fighting game is to keep all characters as balanced as possible, and a "broken" character is a character who is very distinctively unbalanced and almost unfair. For example, Geese Howard in SNK vs Capcom chaos is considered broken because he has an easy to execute combo which can potentially become inescapable and more often than not destroy the opponent in one attack. Many SNK boss characters are notorious for regularly being guilty of belonging in this category as well. In Soul Calibur III (Japanese version), Sophitia is sometimes considered a broken character, so was toned down for the US and PAL versions. Such characters are often banned from tournament play.
-Top Tier:
Characters who have had the most success, and are often used to successful degrees. Once in a while, a character who may be considered to have a little too much of an advantage may be in this spot as well. Some people may refer to this as "S" tier.
-High Tier:
Characters who have had a great deal of success, and are considered to have an equal chance against any opponent. Some people may refer to this as "A" tier.
-Middle Tier:
Characters who have had moderate success, and are used sparingly. They can be used efficiently against most opponents. Some people may refer to this as "B" tier.
-Low Tier:
Characters who have been generally selected very rarely, so rarely that regardless of the said character's success or failure, it still doesn't change their place on the list. Some people may refer to this as "C" tier.
-Bottom Tier:
Characters who have more in-game disadvantages than advantages, to the point where it is unfair. Although it is certainly possible to win with characters in this section, said character and player will be very hard-pressed to win and will have more going against them than for them. For example, in Tekken 5, the character of Kuma is considered Bottom Tier. This is because while he may have a chance against lower to middle tier characters, no matter how competently he's played it is virtually impossible to find a distinct advantage against higher tier's when they are played with equal skill due to his very risky moves that offer little return. Some people may refer to this as "D" tier.
Some games might go as far as to have a "E" tier, which is often referred to as "Garbage Tier". The characters in this tier are characters who are so bad that they are nothing more than a joke. If you use a character from this tier and if you play against people who are not beginners then you will find it virtually impossible to win any of your matches.
Controversy:
Arguments about the existence (or non-existence) of tiers are commonplace among gaming boards, where the general consensus among experienced players is that tiers do indeed exist. (ie: choosing certain characters/weapons/skills over others will yield better results for the user).
Tier listings are often scrutinized by players who misunderstand its purpose. Many misinformed players mistake the Tier listings as a "Best Character" listing, and that the intent is to say X character can not win against Y because X is high tier and Y is low tier. This is not entirely true. Given that X is a high tier character and Y is a low tier character, it is very possible that a player using Y can beat a player using X. However, if both players are of equal (read: EQUAL) skill, X will beat Y more often. Therefore, in order to win consistently, the player using a lower tier character will need to work harder and be more skilled than the player using a higher tier character. Basically higher tier characters make it easier for you to win. They do NOT guarantee 100% that you will beat your opponent. They just MAKE IT MUCH EASIER to beat your opponent. If your opponent is much better skilled at the game than you then it won't matter which character you choose you will still be beaten. TIER LISTS ONLY COME INTO PLAY WHEN ALL PLAYERS ARE OF EQUAL SKILL. Don't think that just because you chose the top ranking character you will now be able to sweep the floor with everybody. There is always somebody out there more skilled than you. ALWAYS.
The influence of Tiers in play is also often misunderstood: in a well balanced game, any effect of tiers will likely go unnoticed in low to mid level play, and low tier characters may actually be perceived as being better than characters who are actually much higher ranked. For example, if a low ranked character has an easy to use, fast, and damaging mid-low-low-mid combo, which less skilled players often have difficulty blocking, that character may be abused in low to mid level play. However, after becoming more skilled, a player may notice that when blocked, the combo leaves you open long enough for a damaging juggle or punishment move.
More on tier ranks:
-Top Tier (Also known as "S" tier)
Top Tier generally refers to any characters in a fighting game that has a clearly distinct advantage over a majority of the other characters in the game, especially in known fighting gamer circles where all characters from any game are categorized according to their overall strengths. These advantages come in a few forms:
*Large majority of higher priority attacks.
*Easy, powerful combos (often repeatable into each other).
*Innate advantages over other characters (being resistant to certain attacks, etc.).
*Software glitches or bugs in combo engine that provide unfair or unbalanced advantages that are not readily accessible otherwise (i.e. bugs).
*Easy spammable moves (moves that can easily and quickly be repeated into each other).
*Less risk and more reward involved when performing these characters moves/combos/juggles.
*Much higher damage output than other characters.
These are all advantages that higher tier characters have over the rest of the characters in the game.
Usage of tiers:
In hardcore fighting gamer circles, this is an often-discussed topic, especially when it comes to who they would use in an organized tournament. These tournaments generally are for the "best of the best" to show off their skills under pressure, and having a top tier character, while not always, can give them an edge on their opponent. If both players use the same character, it comes down to their individual skills that determine the outcome. If both players are of equal skill then the one who chooses the higher ranking character will have an edge over his opponent, and his opponent will have to work harder for the win. These tiers are generally broken into 3 subgroups (which can more specifically be divided further if deemed too broad into such things as "near top" or "upper middle"):
*Top tier, which has been discussed.
*2nd (or Middle) tier.
*Bottom tier.
Middle tier is for well-balanced characters that don't have any real stand-out characteristics, but can put up a good fight if both players are of equal skill. Middle tier can also be sub-divided into Upper-mid, Mid-mid, and Low-mid tiers. Upper Middle tier Characters are generally characters that are much better than the others, but aren't enough to be dominate characters. In the end, though, middle tier characters have a much harder time eliminating professional top-tier players. Bottom tier characters have a decidedly large disadvantage in terms of their usability, and are rarely used in tournaments. Such underdog characters have very little chance of winning unless their user is a much higher skilled player than the top tier user. Any fighting game since Street Fighter 2 on will have all their usable characters grouped into these three generally, with top tier being the most preferred.
*The following information is curtesy of Jim Mile*
Tier Lists:
In fighting games, a tier list is an ordering of the characters in the game to reflect that some are "better" than others. Here I am going to discuss what I believe are the important issues surrounding tiers. I am starting with how tiers can be constructed.
-Tiers, Part 1 What do we mean by "better"?
This is the biggest single misunderstanding with tier lists, that people disagree about what criteria should be used to rate characters. Here are the most common interpretations of what a tier list should be based on, with pros and cons, and my analysis for each.
1.) How easy a character is to use effectively:
Pros:
-Gives information to beginners about which characters they can have early success with, against other beginners.
Cons:
-Fails to account for powerful but difficult-to-use characters, which are often the ones used in high level play.
-Only applies to beginners.
My analysis:
This is the classic scrub interpretation of tiers. Beginners who lose to characters with good, easy-to-perform moves complain that their opponent only used that character because they are "top tier". When someone says that, they are using a limited definition of tiers, which only applies to beginner level play. It encourages only learning "tricks" to beat other beginners, rather than developing deeper strategies. The kind of person who follows this definition of tiers is the kind who, as soon as they play anyone who is not a beginner, is easily beaten by what they consider "low tier" characters played to a high level.
2.) Mathematical analysis of everything in the game:
Every move (including combos) is simulated against every other in every possible instance to construct a game-theoretic payoff matrix. Based on the number of instances in which a particular move "wins out", and how much damage it deals when it does, characters can be ordered according to the power and usability of the moves they possess.
Pros:
-Not limited by the skill of the player. It judges how good a character is based on what is possible, which means that, no matter how skilled players get, the tier list remains valid.
Cons:
-Most games are too complex to be mathematically modelled with current computer technology. Although the time limit on rounds means that there are only finite possibilities within a match (this is important, as it means that wider strategies can be covered in the matrix, rather than just moves and combos), there are still far too many to consider them all and apply sophisticated game theory in order that probability weighting can be placed on strategies.
-Necessitates assumptions about reaction times which will either be unrealistic (e.g. perfect reactions, so counters can always be made) or will model reaction times (e.g. by probability), failing to account for the variance in human reaction speeds and the element of human pattern recognition/mind games (also interpreted as "yomi" - knowing the opponent's mind¹).
-Human execution is imperfect. The analysis may yield very effective (possibly 100% win-forcing) strategies which require such perfect execution that no human could consistently perform them. If tiers are to be more than an academic and theoretical exercise then this is important. Similarly, if a strategy relies upon calculation of very precise probabilities in-game, then it may not be applicable to human emulation.
My analysis:
It's technically interesting, and will be particularly interesting if one day it is straightforward to write programs to play fighting games, but from a practical point of view it is impossible to form a complete set of data and analysis method to give a cast iron tier list. It is useful for discussion of specific (common) occurrences within the game though.
3.) Success in major tournaments:
Pros:
-Transparent. Subjectivity is eliminated in favour of statistics, and the data is easy to analyse.
-Relates character usage directly to winning - the aim of the game - rather than speculated causes of success.
Cons:
-Does not tell us why certain characters are better than others, just that they are.
My analysis:
This is the clearest way to define tiers, and the one to which most subscribe at the highest level. A tier list is just that: a list, not an explanation. If you want to know which characters are best at the top level then you look at which ones are winning at the top level. Simple.
4.) Specific "good" moves and strategies:
Analysing different characters' moves (e.g. Nina's oki in Tekken 5, Yun's Genei Jin in Third Strike, Cable's beam in Marvel VS Capcom 2), and explaining why they are powerful.
Pros:
-Explains why characters are good.
Cons:
-Can be subjective.
My analysis:
I rate this method highly, because it gives justification to the list, which none of the others do. In the mathematical model, the number crunching will be so complicated that the meaning is impossible to understand in straightforward terms, and going purely by tournament results gives no idea as to why certain characters are good - it could just be that no-one has bothered to learn the others, or the tournaments are dominated by a few very skilful players who like certain characters but would be even better if they switched to other characters.
My opinion of what tier lists should be:
I think that construction of a tier list should be primarily based on tournament results. However, the list should be supplemented with WHY these particular characters are good, by analysing what the best players do with them and identifying the "good" strategies, so that some actual understanding can be obtained as to what makes a character in the game "better" than another. This means that the fashion element² can be reduced. Analysing "why?" also allows more refinement in the list, so that after the tournament data has given a rough grouping of top 3, second tier, third tier, ..., bottom tier, there can be some discussion, conjecture, and theorizing about where within the group each character lies. The mathematical, theory-fighting approach comes in handy when trying to find out what makes a character good because the common strategies can be analysed and examined with frame data and game-engine experiments. This can also lead to finding flaws in certain strategies, which shakes up tournaments and further advances the tier list. Just take a look at the latest Japanese Third Strike tier list. I'm pretty sure it uses that kind of analysis, though I might have a bash at deciphering the Japanese on the site to see if I can gain any insights into their tier construction methods. One strand I hope has been clear in this entry is that tiers are about high level play, the character advantages that are in play at the very highest, world class level. In my next entry I want to talk a bit about how this is misinterpreted by many gamers, who are not playing at the kind of level to which tiers have any real relevance.
*¹ See: www.sirlin.net/archive/yomi-layer-3-knowing-mind-of-the-opponent/
*² The "fashion" element: where lots of characters are more popular to start with, meaning more of those ones are seen in the later stages of the tournament.
Tiers, Part 2: Eight Bullet Points:
*Many games still have the potential for a skilful player to use a particular character in an original way that changes the game forever.
*People have individual play styles. Learning a character that suits your style will get you further than just picking a top 3 character because they're supposed to be the best. In other words you will do better with a character that fits with your play style than you would by just choosing a character because he/she is top tier. (Just because a character is top tier does not mean that YOU will do well with said character and just because a character is bottom tier does not mean that YOU will do poorly with him/her).
*The ubiquity of supposedly top tier characters often means their strategies and "tricks" are well known, which can give you the element of surprise if you use a less popular character.
*Tiers can change over time because the more time people invest in the game the more they learn how to deal with certain situations.
*Low level players whine constantly about tiers, but professional players rarely use the word. Pros tend to refer to specific strategies and moves, rather than generalities.
*Any character played well is good enough to compete among friends. Outside of pro-level, anyone discussing tiers is just looking for excuses.
*Tier lists aren't based on or influenced by "real world matches". They are made to represent the winning capability of characters in relation to each other. They are based strictly on the tools of characters, not the skill of the players. (Tiers are based on what the character can do. Not on what the player can do. There have been many people in the past who have taken low level characters and done extremely well against any opponents. Having said that you should also keep in mind that, to a certain extent, you are limited by what your character can do).
*Tier lists are just a listing of which characters have the best tools to compete in the game. It's saying that given two equally skilled higher level players a certain character will have more wins given a set. Yes, it is possible for a D tier player to win over a S tier player but it is very hard for D tier to put pressure on S tier - because S tier has more and better tools to win. As players become more experienced with the game and the characters they will learn to better understand and use the tools given to each character, thus becoming better with a character that they previously were not good with and this will cause the tier list to constantly change. For example there might be a new tactic that people figure out with a C tier that would make him/her a lot better and this would cause him/her to go up in the tier list. In other words the tier list is constantly changing as the players become more experienced with the game and learn new tactics with each character. You should also be aware that patches to the game can also cause changes to the tier list. For example the game developers might notice that a certain character has a combo or move or strategy that is way too easy to exploit and loop over and over again and so they might bring out a patch to fix that. Thus effectively bringing that character down in the Tier List. So be sure to check back for updates to the tier list whenever a new patch is released for the game.
One final note about tier lists:
Having read through all that don't worry if you still don't fully understand the concept of tier lists. Just keep these things in mind:
-Every character has a weakness. Think of it like Rock, Paper, Scissors. Rock beats Scissors but Paper beats Rock while Scissors beats Paper. It's the same with characters in a fighting game. There will be some characters that your character is good at beating and there will be some characters that your character has trouble beating. It's up to the player to learn and adapt to their opponent.
-In games which have a team/tag mode things become a lot more complicated. When playing as a team if you choose the right teammates it can help out any weaknesses your character might have. By choosing the correct partners you can give your own character a boost and he/she might be higher on the tier list with the correct partners. In other words choosing the correct teammates can boost that low tier character of yours up to a middle tier character if you use your team correctly."
Here is a detailed explanation of what a tier list is and how it works. (The layout might look a little strange because this is taken from a text file. It is based on the video game TEKKEN TAG TOURNAMENT 2 for the PS3 and Xbox 360, but it applies to all games. The information is taken from multiple sources across the web.):
WARNING! WALL OF TEXT TO FOLLOW!
"Tiers:
In layman's terms a tier list is a list where all the characters in the game are ranked from best to worst. It is determined by how good a character is in the game. The tier list shows you how good each character is when he/she/it is taken to their full potential. In other words the tier list shows you how good the character is when you know absolutely everything about the character and can do everything of the character with no trouble at all and never make any mistakes during matches. Again, a tier list is a list that shows you how good a character is when that character is taken to their maximum potential.
A "tier" is a term used commonly within fighting game circles and tournaments to describe a character's general success in tournaments and common battles of the fighting game from which they hail. In some cases the general structure of the tiers for a particular game are agreed upon by the player community, with only slight variation. With other games, the tiers may be the subject of fierce debate with strongly differing viewpoints. By their nature, tiers cannot be regarded as pure fact, but ideally come about from educated opinions and thoughtful observations supported by evidence as tournament results.
Tiers are not limited to characters in fighting games. The concept of tiers may be applied to all other games in which players are allowed to choose from characters, weapons, strategies, etc. Tiers may be used to describe how effectively these choices accomplish the general goal of the particular game. It can be argued that as it is very unlikely that a game is perfectly balanced, particularly complex modern video games, that all games have tiers to an extent. Those who abide by this thinking believe there are methods or choices that are inherently more efficient or more effective than others. Just as in First Person Shooters certain guns are more efficient than others at taking out your enemies; and in racing games certain cars are more efficient at winning races. Fighting games are similar in that certain characters are more efficient at beating opponents.
The concept and controversy around tiers is mostly limited to competitive fighting games, as their arcade and home console roots make them much less likely to be patched. That is, if the creator realizes that they made a mistake in designing a character who is too powerful, it is difficult to fix. This leads to characters and tactics which can seem very radical and overpowering to a third party, especially a gamer not familiar with the fighting game genre.
Examples:
Although it differs from game to game, the usual formation of the tier listing in fighting games goes like this:
-Broken Characters:
Although not always used in tier listing, once in a while a character or characters in a fighting game are given such an overwhelming advantage, that they are considered "broken". Such characters may be labelled as being "God Tier." The main priority in a fighting game is to keep all characters as balanced as possible, and a "broken" character is a character who is very distinctively unbalanced and almost unfair. For example, Geese Howard in SNK vs Capcom chaos is considered broken because he has an easy to execute combo which can potentially become inescapable and more often than not destroy the opponent in one attack. Many SNK boss characters are notorious for regularly being guilty of belonging in this category as well. In Soul Calibur III (Japanese version), Sophitia is sometimes considered a broken character, so was toned down for the US and PAL versions. Such characters are often banned from tournament play.
-Top Tier:
Characters who have had the most success, and are often used to successful degrees. Once in a while, a character who may be considered to have a little too much of an advantage may be in this spot as well. Some people may refer to this as "S" tier.
-High Tier:
Characters who have had a great deal of success, and are considered to have an equal chance against any opponent. Some people may refer to this as "A" tier.
-Middle Tier:
Characters who have had moderate success, and are used sparingly. They can be used efficiently against most opponents. Some people may refer to this as "B" tier.
-Low Tier:
Characters who have been generally selected very rarely, so rarely that regardless of the said character's success or failure, it still doesn't change their place on the list. Some people may refer to this as "C" tier.
-Bottom Tier:
Characters who have more in-game disadvantages than advantages, to the point where it is unfair. Although it is certainly possible to win with characters in this section, said character and player will be very hard-pressed to win and will have more going against them than for them. For example, in Tekken 5, the character of Kuma is considered Bottom Tier. This is because while he may have a chance against lower to middle tier characters, no matter how competently he's played it is virtually impossible to find a distinct advantage against higher tier's when they are played with equal skill due to his very risky moves that offer little return. Some people may refer to this as "D" tier.
Some games might go as far as to have a "E" tier, which is often referred to as "Garbage Tier". The characters in this tier are characters who are so bad that they are nothing more than a joke. If you use a character from this tier and if you play against people who are not beginners then you will find it virtually impossible to win any of your matches.
Controversy:
Arguments about the existence (or non-existence) of tiers are commonplace among gaming boards, where the general consensus among experienced players is that tiers do indeed exist. (ie: choosing certain characters/weapons/skills over others will yield better results for the user).
Tier listings are often scrutinized by players who misunderstand its purpose. Many misinformed players mistake the Tier listings as a "Best Character" listing, and that the intent is to say X character can not win against Y because X is high tier and Y is low tier. This is not entirely true. Given that X is a high tier character and Y is a low tier character, it is very possible that a player using Y can beat a player using X. However, if both players are of equal (read: EQUAL) skill, X will beat Y more often. Therefore, in order to win consistently, the player using a lower tier character will need to work harder and be more skilled than the player using a higher tier character. Basically higher tier characters make it easier for you to win. They do NOT guarantee 100% that you will beat your opponent. They just MAKE IT MUCH EASIER to beat your opponent. If your opponent is much better skilled at the game than you then it won't matter which character you choose you will still be beaten. TIER LISTS ONLY COME INTO PLAY WHEN ALL PLAYERS ARE OF EQUAL SKILL. Don't think that just because you chose the top ranking character you will now be able to sweep the floor with everybody. There is always somebody out there more skilled than you. ALWAYS.
The influence of Tiers in play is also often misunderstood: in a well balanced game, any effect of tiers will likely go unnoticed in low to mid level play, and low tier characters may actually be perceived as being better than characters who are actually much higher ranked. For example, if a low ranked character has an easy to use, fast, and damaging mid-low-low-mid combo, which less skilled players often have difficulty blocking, that character may be abused in low to mid level play. However, after becoming more skilled, a player may notice that when blocked, the combo leaves you open long enough for a damaging juggle or punishment move.
More on tier ranks:
-Top Tier (Also known as "S" tier)
Top Tier generally refers to any characters in a fighting game that has a clearly distinct advantage over a majority of the other characters in the game, especially in known fighting gamer circles where all characters from any game are categorized according to their overall strengths. These advantages come in a few forms:
*Large majority of higher priority attacks.
*Easy, powerful combos (often repeatable into each other).
*Innate advantages over other characters (being resistant to certain attacks, etc.).
*Software glitches or bugs in combo engine that provide unfair or unbalanced advantages that are not readily accessible otherwise (i.e. bugs).
*Easy spammable moves (moves that can easily and quickly be repeated into each other).
*Less risk and more reward involved when performing these characters moves/combos/juggles.
*Much higher damage output than other characters.
These are all advantages that higher tier characters have over the rest of the characters in the game.
Usage of tiers:
In hardcore fighting gamer circles, this is an often-discussed topic, especially when it comes to who they would use in an organized tournament. These tournaments generally are for the "best of the best" to show off their skills under pressure, and having a top tier character, while not always, can give them an edge on their opponent. If both players use the same character, it comes down to their individual skills that determine the outcome. If both players are of equal skill then the one who chooses the higher ranking character will have an edge over his opponent, and his opponent will have to work harder for the win. These tiers are generally broken into 3 subgroups (which can more specifically be divided further if deemed too broad into such things as "near top" or "upper middle"):
*Top tier, which has been discussed.
*2nd (or Middle) tier.
*Bottom tier.
Middle tier is for well-balanced characters that don't have any real stand-out characteristics, but can put up a good fight if both players are of equal skill. Middle tier can also be sub-divided into Upper-mid, Mid-mid, and Low-mid tiers. Upper Middle tier Characters are generally characters that are much better than the others, but aren't enough to be dominate characters. In the end, though, middle tier characters have a much harder time eliminating professional top-tier players. Bottom tier characters have a decidedly large disadvantage in terms of their usability, and are rarely used in tournaments. Such underdog characters have very little chance of winning unless their user is a much higher skilled player than the top tier user. Any fighting game since Street Fighter 2 on will have all their usable characters grouped into these three generally, with top tier being the most preferred.
*The following information is curtesy of Jim Mile*
Tier Lists:
In fighting games, a tier list is an ordering of the characters in the game to reflect that some are "better" than others. Here I am going to discuss what I believe are the important issues surrounding tiers. I am starting with how tiers can be constructed.
-Tiers, Part 1 What do we mean by "better"?
This is the biggest single misunderstanding with tier lists, that people disagree about what criteria should be used to rate characters. Here are the most common interpretations of what a tier list should be based on, with pros and cons, and my analysis for each.
1.) How easy a character is to use effectively:
Pros:
-Gives information to beginners about which characters they can have early success with, against other beginners.
Cons:
-Fails to account for powerful but difficult-to-use characters, which are often the ones used in high level play.
-Only applies to beginners.
My analysis:
This is the classic scrub interpretation of tiers. Beginners who lose to characters with good, easy-to-perform moves complain that their opponent only used that character because they are "top tier". When someone says that, they are using a limited definition of tiers, which only applies to beginner level play. It encourages only learning "tricks" to beat other beginners, rather than developing deeper strategies. The kind of person who follows this definition of tiers is the kind who, as soon as they play anyone who is not a beginner, is easily beaten by what they consider "low tier" characters played to a high level.
2.) Mathematical analysis of everything in the game:
Every move (including combos) is simulated against every other in every possible instance to construct a game-theoretic payoff matrix. Based on the number of instances in which a particular move "wins out", and how much damage it deals when it does, characters can be ordered according to the power and usability of the moves they possess.
Pros:
-Not limited by the skill of the player. It judges how good a character is based on what is possible, which means that, no matter how skilled players get, the tier list remains valid.
Cons:
-Most games are too complex to be mathematically modelled with current computer technology. Although the time limit on rounds means that there are only finite possibilities within a match (this is important, as it means that wider strategies can be covered in the matrix, rather than just moves and combos), there are still far too many to consider them all and apply sophisticated game theory in order that probability weighting can be placed on strategies.
-Necessitates assumptions about reaction times which will either be unrealistic (e.g. perfect reactions, so counters can always be made) or will model reaction times (e.g. by probability), failing to account for the variance in human reaction speeds and the element of human pattern recognition/mind games (also interpreted as "yomi" - knowing the opponent's mind¹).
-Human execution is imperfect. The analysis may yield very effective (possibly 100% win-forcing) strategies which require such perfect execution that no human could consistently perform them. If tiers are to be more than an academic and theoretical exercise then this is important. Similarly, if a strategy relies upon calculation of very precise probabilities in-game, then it may not be applicable to human emulation.
My analysis:
It's technically interesting, and will be particularly interesting if one day it is straightforward to write programs to play fighting games, but from a practical point of view it is impossible to form a complete set of data and analysis method to give a cast iron tier list. It is useful for discussion of specific (common) occurrences within the game though.
3.) Success in major tournaments:
Pros:
-Transparent. Subjectivity is eliminated in favour of statistics, and the data is easy to analyse.
-Relates character usage directly to winning - the aim of the game - rather than speculated causes of success.
Cons:
-Does not tell us why certain characters are better than others, just that they are.
My analysis:
This is the clearest way to define tiers, and the one to which most subscribe at the highest level. A tier list is just that: a list, not an explanation. If you want to know which characters are best at the top level then you look at which ones are winning at the top level. Simple.
4.) Specific "good" moves and strategies:
Analysing different characters' moves (e.g. Nina's oki in Tekken 5, Yun's Genei Jin in Third Strike, Cable's beam in Marvel VS Capcom 2), and explaining why they are powerful.
Pros:
-Explains why characters are good.
Cons:
-Can be subjective.
My analysis:
I rate this method highly, because it gives justification to the list, which none of the others do. In the mathematical model, the number crunching will be so complicated that the meaning is impossible to understand in straightforward terms, and going purely by tournament results gives no idea as to why certain characters are good - it could just be that no-one has bothered to learn the others, or the tournaments are dominated by a few very skilful players who like certain characters but would be even better if they switched to other characters.
My opinion of what tier lists should be:
I think that construction of a tier list should be primarily based on tournament results. However, the list should be supplemented with WHY these particular characters are good, by analysing what the best players do with them and identifying the "good" strategies, so that some actual understanding can be obtained as to what makes a character in the game "better" than another. This means that the fashion element² can be reduced. Analysing "why?" also allows more refinement in the list, so that after the tournament data has given a rough grouping of top 3, second tier, third tier, ..., bottom tier, there can be some discussion, conjecture, and theorizing about where within the group each character lies. The mathematical, theory-fighting approach comes in handy when trying to find out what makes a character good because the common strategies can be analysed and examined with frame data and game-engine experiments. This can also lead to finding flaws in certain strategies, which shakes up tournaments and further advances the tier list. Just take a look at the latest Japanese Third Strike tier list. I'm pretty sure it uses that kind of analysis, though I might have a bash at deciphering the Japanese on the site to see if I can gain any insights into their tier construction methods. One strand I hope has been clear in this entry is that tiers are about high level play, the character advantages that are in play at the very highest, world class level. In my next entry I want to talk a bit about how this is misinterpreted by many gamers, who are not playing at the kind of level to which tiers have any real relevance.
*¹ See: www.sirlin.net/archive/yomi-layer-3-knowing-mind-of-the-opponent/
*² The "fashion" element: where lots of characters are more popular to start with, meaning more of those ones are seen in the later stages of the tournament.
Tiers, Part 2: Eight Bullet Points:
*Many games still have the potential for a skilful player to use a particular character in an original way that changes the game forever.
*People have individual play styles. Learning a character that suits your style will get you further than just picking a top 3 character because they're supposed to be the best. In other words you will do better with a character that fits with your play style than you would by just choosing a character because he/she is top tier. (Just because a character is top tier does not mean that YOU will do well with said character and just because a character is bottom tier does not mean that YOU will do poorly with him/her).
*The ubiquity of supposedly top tier characters often means their strategies and "tricks" are well known, which can give you the element of surprise if you use a less popular character.
*Tiers can change over time because the more time people invest in the game the more they learn how to deal with certain situations.
*Low level players whine constantly about tiers, but professional players rarely use the word. Pros tend to refer to specific strategies and moves, rather than generalities.
*Any character played well is good enough to compete among friends. Outside of pro-level, anyone discussing tiers is just looking for excuses.
*Tier lists aren't based on or influenced by "real world matches". They are made to represent the winning capability of characters in relation to each other. They are based strictly on the tools of characters, not the skill of the players. (Tiers are based on what the character can do. Not on what the player can do. There have been many people in the past who have taken low level characters and done extremely well against any opponents. Having said that you should also keep in mind that, to a certain extent, you are limited by what your character can do).
*Tier lists are just a listing of which characters have the best tools to compete in the game. It's saying that given two equally skilled higher level players a certain character will have more wins given a set. Yes, it is possible for a D tier player to win over a S tier player but it is very hard for D tier to put pressure on S tier - because S tier has more and better tools to win. As players become more experienced with the game and the characters they will learn to better understand and use the tools given to each character, thus becoming better with a character that they previously were not good with and this will cause the tier list to constantly change. For example there might be a new tactic that people figure out with a C tier that would make him/her a lot better and this would cause him/her to go up in the tier list. In other words the tier list is constantly changing as the players become more experienced with the game and learn new tactics with each character. You should also be aware that patches to the game can also cause changes to the tier list. For example the game developers might notice that a certain character has a combo or move or strategy that is way too easy to exploit and loop over and over again and so they might bring out a patch to fix that. Thus effectively bringing that character down in the Tier List. So be sure to check back for updates to the tier list whenever a new patch is released for the game.
One final note about tier lists:
Having read through all that don't worry if you still don't fully understand the concept of tier lists. Just keep these things in mind:
-Every character has a weakness. Think of it like Rock, Paper, Scissors. Rock beats Scissors but Paper beats Rock while Scissors beats Paper. It's the same with characters in a fighting game. There will be some characters that your character is good at beating and there will be some characters that your character has trouble beating. It's up to the player to learn and adapt to their opponent.
-In games which have a team/tag mode things become a lot more complicated. When playing as a team if you choose the right teammates it can help out any weaknesses your character might have. By choosing the correct partners you can give your own character a boost and he/she might be higher on the tier list with the correct partners. In other words choosing the correct teammates can boost that low tier character of yours up to a middle tier character if you use your team correctly."
RubinRoon
Member
I dont want to start anything, I am just genuinely intersted why you would think that. I am very open to new ideas and opinions, so it would be very much appreciated if you pointed out your reasoning behind this very briefly, because, after thinking about it, I just cant find a reason why tina should be the worst character in the game.
To me she is just a solid mid tier character with a strong damage output.
I agree that she's a solid character, but who would you say is worse than Tina? If she's mid tier, who's low tier?
Eliot and Phase 4 no question.
There are three others I feel are lower than Tina but I'd be wasting my breath on that note.
Okay, I'll give you P4. I'm not convinced about Eliot, though. I think they're about the same. Tina does far more damage and is heavier and faster, but Eliot has way better mixups, defense, and area denial.
RubinRoon
Member
True Eliots range game is better, but then again, thats where his gameplan takes place. Would be weird to be beaten there by a character that doesnt specialise in it.
Eliot has parries, Tina has OH´s, and decent ones i might add (especially 46T) + her tackle off the ground denies a lot of force tech shenanigans, thats what makes her a good choice against Rachel as well. 1p, 44p, 3p, 3(hold)p are very good crushes that can help your defense as well as the now properly working low crush 4k, which is now safe as well.
How many people use her adv mid k hold? I use it regularly, because it only does slightly less damage then the 2 part mid k hold and gives you some sweet frame adv + the possibilty of landing her 3pp (which is safe, if they block) on BT opponents, which leads to a limbo stun + guaranteed launcher. Try backdashing? Eat 6 h+k and strangle hold ground throw for great justice. Speaking of holds, hers are far more damaging than Eliot`s.
So imo her lack of parries can be compensated by having better crushes, actually being faster, heavier (passive defense ^^ ) and having actually threatening holds.
As for mix ups I am not really sure. All I can say is Tina has some string ender launchers (6ppk, 9pk, pp6p, pppk, 44pk, 6ppp, 9ppp) her BT shenanigans, quick access to cb, her kp limbo stun. Every time she launches you, expect to lose 1/3 of your health. Also throws that can decide a match, but Eliot has those as well.
I dunno, I just feel she is a little slept on after her nerfs in 5U. Her 12 f mid has to be respected at every start of a match, also, you dont want to guess and eat a 132 throw.
Eliot has parries, Tina has OH´s, and decent ones i might add (especially 46T) + her tackle off the ground denies a lot of force tech shenanigans, thats what makes her a good choice against Rachel as well. 1p, 44p, 3p, 3(hold)p are very good crushes that can help your defense as well as the now properly working low crush 4k, which is now safe as well.
How many people use her adv mid k hold? I use it regularly, because it only does slightly less damage then the 2 part mid k hold and gives you some sweet frame adv + the possibilty of landing her 3pp (which is safe, if they block) on BT opponents, which leads to a limbo stun + guaranteed launcher. Try backdashing? Eat 6 h+k and strangle hold ground throw for great justice. Speaking of holds, hers are far more damaging than Eliot`s.
So imo her lack of parries can be compensated by having better crushes, actually being faster, heavier (passive defense ^^ ) and having actually threatening holds.
As for mix ups I am not really sure. All I can say is Tina has some string ender launchers (6ppk, 9pk, pp6p, pppk, 44pk, 6ppp, 9ppp) her BT shenanigans, quick access to cb, her kp limbo stun. Every time she launches you, expect to lose 1/3 of your health. Also throws that can decide a match, but Eliot has those as well.
I dunno, I just feel she is a little slept on after her nerfs in 5U. Her 12 f mid has to be respected at every start of a match, also, you dont want to guess and eat a 132 throw.
Rapham0n
Active Member
Nonsense, someone is always willing to listen. So who do you think is top 5, and who is bottom 5? (I'm not looking to start an argument, I genuinely am interested to hear your thoughts).
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooope
I have no interest in publicly opening that can of worms and squabbling with everyone in circles.
If you're really curious, you can send me a PM about it.
2 hold punish M.D.T.'s(112 dmg a piece) and her advanced kick hold(75 dmg) in a single round will as near as make no difference kill you. Keep in mind that despite not really being a striker her strikes aren't exactly shit. The minute and I mean the minute you get sloppy against a good Tina is the minute you die.
With Eliot its like you have the MK Trilogy endurance mode cheat on. You need powerful spacing skills just to stay alive and you (from what I noticed) have to bore and tire your opponent into doing something stupid in order to win with him.
Who the hell compared these two? IMHO Tina is miles better than Eliot.
Eliot's throw game is among the best in the game. 66 damage HiCH reset throw, 77 damage HiCH low reset throw, and a 113 damage HiCH launch throw (not cieling dependent). Hella long strings and delays (also safe and tracking ender for almost every string). Parries, good crushes, good lows (+19 on fastest). His 9f strike is kinda dumb now, but it still allows you to escape a lot of mixups 'cause it knockbacks a lot and kbd takes him out of range of pretty much everything.
Eliot is bad, but don't just bandwagon on that. Actually learn the character and then give your own opinions on how bad he is.
Eliot is bad, but don't just bandwagon on that. Actually learn the character and then give your own opinions on how bad he is.
My own opinion is that he is incontestably bottom 3. And given that there are people who are not bottom 3 who still struggle to a ridiculously unnecessary degree, that's bad.
I don't disagree.
EDIT: Real talk, when I see Momiji picked against Eliot, I just want to stop playing. It's such an obnoxious matchup.
EDIT: Real talk, when I see Momiji picked against Eliot, I just want to stop playing. It's such an obnoxious matchup.
lol
He is not better than Tina. You do realize that this woman as I pointed out in this thread earlier can consistently kill you with 3 moves in a round right? I actually fear and respect a good Tina player for If I don't I die. I do not respect Eliot unless he has really good spacing and footsies in which case I am respecting the skill of the player and not his "tools". He does not have anything to threaten me with at all bro.
Rapham0n
Active Member
Great damage output does not make her a good character if that's the only thing she has going for her though.
Please explain how Tina's consistently killing someone in three moves.
She actually has some good mixups, solid oki and some decent spacing tools, spacing tools that some other grapplers in this game wish they had.
Believe it or not Tina has some pretty decent stuns from her strikes, especially on counter hit. If you are not used to fighting her ass your going to try and hold out of them and that's when you eat a nice, long 132 DMG dick. You have to fight Tina with caution because if you don't then you are going to lose large chunks of heath every time she touches you. Yes they nerfed her strikes and oki a little since vanilla but that just means people have to actually use her as a grappler and not like some hybrid like they used to.
Eliot actually has better stuns. Especially with lows. Tina's lows are pretty terrible except as crushes (which are really good).
And if we're talking about what happens when people don't know how to fight Tina... Well, people don't know Eliot more. No one knows Eliot strings. That shouldn't be a factor, though.
Tina's WR64T doesn't interact with walls like Eliot's 236T can which means it actually does less damage sometimes. It also doesn't corner carry. That said, Tina's 6T44T is fairly strong and she definitely has the upper hand in punishing things.
And if we're talking about what happens when people don't know how to fight Tina... Well, people don't know Eliot more. No one knows Eliot strings. That shouldn't be a factor, though.
Tina's WR64T doesn't interact with walls like Eliot's 236T can which means it actually does less damage sometimes. It also doesn't corner carry. That said, Tina's 6T44T is fairly strong and she definitely has the upper hand in punishing things.