onelasttime
Well-Known Member
I'm going to be maining Pai for sure.
Main Changing
- Thread starter onelasttime
- Start date
DrDogg
Well-Known Member
A tier list is a ranking of every character's tools. No more, no less. However, when Cow mentions that every character is incredible, that's simply not true. Take the worst character in the game and win a tournament with that character. It doesn't change the fact that the character is still the worst in the game.
If you won a match with only counters and throws, that didn't make the character any better, that just proved that you overcame the obstacles placed in front of you. So it's misleading to say every character is incredible. Just like all of Cows combo videos are extremely misleading.
Not disputing the tier system here, but playing devil's advocate. Say they make two characters: Hayate and Alpha-Hayate (Haha, see what I did there?). Both characters play identical in terms of moveset, speed, damage, reach, etc. except that Hayate's throws deal half-damage, and Alpha-Hayate's counters deal one-third damage. Which belongs in a higher tier? While throws are often more reliable than counters, they can't get you out of a heavy combo chain. Logistically, that info is interpretive, as it's situationally relevant and adheres to someone's play style.
I find Hayate in DOA3 and 4 to be overwhelmingly top-tier, and yet someone I know plays far better with Bass in both games, having spent roughly equal time and dedication to learning each (to be clear: I'm horrible with Bass in both games, including 3, despite hearing he's top-tier for that game). Ultimately, what's high tier may not be the best character that requires the least effort to win with for all players, even with no time or equal time spent learning the rest of the roster. Characters often naturally resonate better or worse with certain players than others. While I think tier systems can help show what a majority of players will find easier/harder to utilize properly, I certain don't think that a higher tier character is universally better than a low-tier character. If that is the case, the game balancers have utterly failed at their jobs (which does happen more often than we'd like, but not all the time).
So in the case of the previous example, perhaps someone naturally plays best using only throws and counters, and thus a character with much higher throw capabilities than striking capabilities which may have put them in lower tiers propels them to be the best character utilizing a certain playstyle, which may or may not be natural for the given player.
DrDogg
Well-Known Member
She has nothing other than throw damage. Her entire game plan revolves around landing a hi counter throw. She has nothing else that stands out.
You're kind of debating semantics. One person may play better using throws than another, but we're strictly talking about the highest level of play. Two random beginners don't adhere to the tier list. It doesn't matter to them because they don't know how to utilize each character's tools to their fullest.
In the tier list, you rank each character by their available tools. If a character has really good throws and that's what makes them top tier, it doesn't matter if one player is better at holds. It doesn't change the fact that the character is good because of their throws. You can't make a character top tier by using tools that aren't considered good. However, you can alter the tier list if you show that a character has more/better tools than originally believed.
So basically, if you play mid tier character that has good counters but bad throws, and you hit those bad throws the entire match and win because of it, those throws are still bad, and that character is still mid tier. However, if you show a new way to use the throws that clearly proves people underestimated how good they are, then the character could move up on the tier list.
The tier list doesn't dictate which characters can win, only who has the best tool set to win.
That may apply in a dichotomous system, but when those throws must be judged as making the character "good, really good, or really really good," it becomes a matter of personal interpretation for me, at least.
I still think that "best" carries a universal nature, but again, that is an issue of semantics.
Anyway, that's just me. I recognize the importance of the tier list and what it proposes, but I think the meaning people give it and they way they interpret it is often contrary to what it actually demonstrates.
Goro Hazuki
Active Member
Yes, Dogg, I know what a tier list is lol
I just said I don't place heavy weighting to it. I understand what you're saying and it does make sense of course. I've always just stuck to the characters I enjoyed and overcame the obstacles. I think you're somewhat similar. I recall seeing you post you liked playing with Lisa in DOA4? I stuck with Christie and Tina regardless just because I like them.I have been away from any competitive circles for a long long time. Last time I played in a competition was Street Fighter Alpha (part one) back when it first came out. But I got to the point where I'd pick the weaker characters (Birdie, Sodom, Dan) and really place well and beat alot of players using Akuma, Ryu, etc.. I always felt if there are obstacles, you can overcome them (if you're bothered).
Anyways, I really think we're on the same page here lol. So no sense to carry on right?
TRI Mike
Well-Known Member
I dunno, I trust Bryan but his opinions are making me think the game is not as great as we thought. During all the post-E3 era Bass and Tina were considered great by everyone and now Tina is low tier¿ I'm not sure if I believe you in that one. If TN just made a game where the three VF characters and Jann Lee are viable then we must start a petition for 3.1 XBLA.
I mean, DOA even with all the problems we know about has been known for being somewhat balanced like VF but Bryan's statements in the last weeks about some characters make me believe that they're simply not viable. And I'm not talking about only Helena.
Tina is supposed to be super safe and have a strong mix-up game, good ways to CB, great SS kick and incredible throw damage along with set-ups that easily guarantee ground and air grabs from almost any launcher. What happened to all that¿
I mean, DOA even with all the problems we know about has been known for being somewhat balanced like VF but Bryan's statements in the last weeks about some characters make me believe that they're simply not viable. And I'm not talking about only Helena.
Tina is supposed to be super safe and have a strong mix-up game, good ways to CB, great SS kick and incredible throw damage along with set-ups that easily guarantee ground and air grabs from almost any launcher. What happened to all that¿
Zeo
Well-Known Member
Pretty much everyone looks viable except Helena, Lisa and possibly Brad this time around, I think you're being a little extreme there.
On par with Hayabusa? No way. He's better now, no doubt about it, but aside from the new stance, he still looks the same. I believe Dogg said that he's low-mid/high-low.
Tell that to Cyber-Evil. =P
I dunno, that's just what I've heard. Haven't got my hands on the game beyond the Alpha demo, so I can't say.
DrDogg
Well-Known Member
Anyways, I really think we're on the same page here lol. So no sense to carry on right?
My comments were mainly toward Cow's remarks, not yours. ^_^
Funny how a game can change throughout development. Every character in the game can win because of the stun system. Guess right enough times and you'll get the win. Only the low tier characters struggle to win and there aren't many of them. Even with them, if you're good at the stun game, they're just as good as the top tier characters.
The SS attacks in the game aren't really that impactful because when used correctly they're connecting when the opponent can't block. So unless a character gets additional guaranteed damage beyond a stun, all SS attacks are virtually the same. Yes, some tech crouch, but again... if you're stepping correctly, it shouldn't matter. So this is a small benefit.
Her CBs aren't any more effective than anyone else's. She has two, but to hit the one at the end of her 7PPP is quite a chore. And I really don't find her mix-up game to be any stronger than other characters. Her lack of safety might even make it worse unless the opponent is stunned.
There's a difference between a character being top tier, and a character owning someone because of lack of knowledge. No one at GVN knew how to defend against Brad. 90% of the stuff Chosen1 was doing was unsafe, but rarely was it punished. He'll continue to run through people until they get in the lab with Brad and learn how to defend against him. Once that happens, Brad will return to his rightful spot on the tier list, although a little higher. He has a few dirty setups, but nothing that compares to Bass, Jann Lee, Hayabusa, Rig, Mila, any of the VF characters, etc.
Sounds like DOA 4 Tina to me. If she ends up being as bad as you say she is, this is really disappointing.
Evil Canadian
Member
DrDogg could you draft up a really rough tier list then, all your opinion of course? You are one of the few people that can put any weight on that right now until release.
My guess is that we'll have to wait and buy the Prima guide, but it would be nice if he could give us something like that earlier.
Evil Canadian
Member
My guess is that we'll have to wait and buy the Prima guide, but it would be nice if he could give us something like that earlier.
I am only going to get the guide for the frame data, any tier list in the guide won't live past the first 3 months of the game. I just would like an opinion based off current knowledge of the moment.
DrDogg
Well-Known Member
I'll post a tier list here on the 25th. That's when I'm basically cleared to talk about everything.
FYI, there's no tier list in the guide. No way I'd go down that path.