|
von Braun posted:From what I understand, tiers in Super Turbo don't really exist anymore. Where did you hear that?
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 21:33 |
|
|
Players who have qualified for SBO in ST and played it there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 18:55
|
|
|
I would expect that kind of mystical nonsense of 3S players but not ST players, who are generally more grounded. Arcadia still makes ST matchup charts and there's still a decent gap between the top and bottom characters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 18:59
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:Tiers are generally overblown and people have a tendency to think there's some kind of real empirical measure of a character's viability in tournament. This is false. It hurts people feelings to internalize it, but come on. What a "tier list" is: A big compilation of matchup ratings. The matchup ratings are the key component. The matchup rating is an estimate of what the W/L ratio would be over a large sample size, assuming equal skilled players who more or less knew all the gimmicks and tricks available to the community at that time and how to play their character. You can be literally "top tier" but a bad tournament character if you have two 3-7's against popular characters. Mochiballs posted:Arguing whether a character is "upper mid" or "mid" is really stupid and pointless. Mainly because there really is no distinction. True! Upper tier just means you have lots of good matchups. Mochiballs posted:I see a lot of arguments where people try so hard to hold onto their understandings of the tiers, but if you follow a game long enough the tiers start to change and to me you really have to be willing to accept that. I don't know what you are saying here, but okay. Tiers "change", yes, but really are just Getting More Accurate as we get a larger sample size and knowledge of matchups. edit- Look at tournament results for SSF4 and compare them to the tier lists that are commonly accepted. Its really accurate!  von Braun posted:Players who have qualified for SBO in ST and played it there. Being good doesn't mean you understand these abstractish ideas about probability. The biggest dude at your gym is almost never the guy who knows the most about physiology or sports science. edit- DarkSydePhil is a really good ST player if you need further evidence 40 OZ fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:00
|
|
|
Yeah but that's assuming that the numbers are accurate. Those numbers are being assigned by people who are quantifying the matchup. It doesn't make sense to say "Well, Magneto beats Storm because I gave the matchup an 8-2". That's a circular argument. So is saying that charts reflect tournament results. It's because the charts are based on tournament results. Where do you put characters that suck against most match ups, but completely dominate 1? Felicia against Strider/Doom? Where is she on a tier list? If she's a good character to know because she'll get you past a common matchup can we say that she's lower on a tier list than blackheart who would be dominated in a Strider heavy area?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:11
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:I think a character can be made bad, but what is an example of an intrinsically bad character? I know comparatively little about the game, but the one that comes to mind is Sean. He was ridiculously good in 2I, so they hit him with the nerf bat so hard in 3S he has moves that are negative on hit. Also, early incarnations of Dan. If you wanna get more technical about it, there are characters like SSFIV T.Hawk, who are like Gief but shittier in almost every conceivable way. He's supposed to be a Gief with a slightly easier time getting in but a slightly worse SPD, but spire is poo poo and dive is much worse than it was in ST, so he mostly just ends up sucking hard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
Tier lists are not based on tournament results. Why do people always say this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:Yeah but that's assuming that the numbers are accurate. Those numbers are being assigned by people who are quantifying the matchup. It doesn't make sense to say "Well, Magneto beats Storm because I gave the matchup an 8-2". That's a circular argument. The matchup gets an 8-2 because eight times out of 10 the good character wins and the bad character gets wrecked. Characters that have few good matchups get placed low-tier. One or Two good matchups out of 30 doesn't redeem the 28 other matches of hardship and disadvantage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:15
|
|
|
Gamest Mook posted:Tier lists are not based on tournament results. Why do people always say this? What are they based on?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:15
|
|
|
Gamest Mook posted:I would expect that kind of mystical nonsense of 3S players Even 12 players think he sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
Opinions of top players.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:What are they based on? Numbers and Playing. Lots of playing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:Yeah but that's assuming that the numbers are accurate. Well, how accurate? A tier list for a game that is 6 months old and has only been played in a few tournaments is undoubtably going to be 'inaccurate.' The tier list will never be Truly Accurate in some absolute sense because thats impossible. But we can "home in on" a very good estimate. edit- It gets more and more accurate the more people play the game. A matchup chart for ST in 2011 is going to be very accurate. You aren't likely to make up some dumb gimmick on your own that is going to change a matchup much at all. Mochiballs posted:Those numbers are being assigned by people who are quantifying the matchup. It doesn't make sense to say "Well, Magneto beats Storm because I gave the matchup an 8-2". That's a circular argument. What are you talking about man. I read this three times and i have no clue what you mean. quote:So is saying that charts reflect tournament results. It's because the charts are based on tournament results. Who said that? Tournament results are a Source for the matchup ratings themselves, and the more accurate the list gets, the more the tournament results will reflect the charts. edit- I feel i have to be really precise here "Reflecting the charts" = On a matchup basis, not an overall A-Tier, B-Tier, etc. quote:Where do you put characters that suck against most match ups, but completely dominate 1? They get a static number. You make this sound like you are shattering some logical fallacy at work here, but this was plainly stated by me in the previous post. Take Honda or Sim from SSF4. Top tier characters, and going by pure numbers, Honda was the Toppest Tier guy. But he certainly wasn't the best tournament character. He squashed all the bad characters in the cast, and had some bad matchups against the best characters. With Sim, he was a brilliant character who had a very very bad matchup against Abel. A 3-7 against a character that wasn't rare at all really hurt Sim. You had to either get lucky tournament draws or counterpick to get around Abel. quote:If she's a good character to know because she'll get you past a common matchup can we say that she's lower on a tier list than blackheart who would be dominated in a Strider heavy area? The tier list is the math. It can be deceiving if you just look right at it, then say "Oh Honda is top tier! Conversation over! I won't have any bad matchups!" The nuances are in your own court. This is what you are talking about. A 7-3 squash matchup against Dan is not worth nearly as much against one against Ryu. 40 OZ fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:22
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:What are they based on? Crowdsourcing
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:22
|
|
|
Gamest Mook posted:Opinions of top players. This is the worst part about it to me because top players debate match ups all day.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:24
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:This is the worst part about it to me because top players debate match ups all day. So the best players, who play the most frequently, help create the lists that show what characters are strong and weak... is what bothers you about the accuracy of a tier list? That makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:25
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:This is the worst part about it to me because top players debate match ups all day. It's almost like tier lists aren't the be-all-end-all of the reality of the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:26
|
|
|
ZerodotJander posted:Tiers are totally overblown especially for new games. But it's pretty dumb to try to claim that characters aren't intrinsically good or bad. I think Marvel 3 is a pretty good modern example of the difference between "high tier" and "low tier" or whatever, though it's obviously not in the same category as Marvel 2 in the severity of the gap. See: Dark Phoenix versus The Entire Cast, Magneto versus The Entire Cast, Hsien-Ko versus The Entire Cast The high damage makes every character "viable" but it doesn't really stop bad characters from being bad. I don't really know if SSF4 or Tekken have such large gaps like Marvel does but there are seriously some common matchups/scenarios that are straight up unwinnable outside of a major gently caress up. (Haggar vs. Wesker for example)
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:27
|
|
|
Gamest Mook posted:Tier lists are not based on tournament results. Why do people always say this? There was this guy who tried that with SF4, but the results weren't very useful and highlighted the problems inherent in trying to turn tier lists into a math problem. This eventually turned into this site, which is what I think that Destructoid writer thinks all fighting game players are like.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:28
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:This is the worst part about it to me because top players debate match ups all day. Honestly, I really think there are some people who are just born to feel incredibly oppressed by the idea of a matchup chart because of some obscure biochemical freudian ideology at work or something. That's okay, really. edit- It is just a shorthand estimate of who is good against who and it is incredibly useful if you are a tournament player or just a player in general. Even if you don't believe in the tier list, you will be a better player if you look at it and practice harder against the ones that it shows you losing. Kuroda isn't going to play your matches for you so you need to practice harder against chun li than you do against sean. :P 40 OZ fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:30
|
|
|
von Braun posted:Players who have qualified for SBO in ST and played it there. I've heard Damdai say something similar to this, the way I understood him is that it's not so much "tiers don't exist" as that Super Turbo is a game where every character has an answer to everything. Tiers definitely exist in that game, there's no question, but the way the game has played out over 17 years is that if you play well enough, you can win any matchup based on your play. Of course, Damdai plays only motion characters, so he hasn't played E. Honda vs Sagat/Shoto.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:35
|
|
|
40 OZ posted:The tier list will never be Truly Accurate in some absolute sense because thats impossible. But we can "home in on" a very good estimate. That's true and I guess what the real argument we're having is. Tier lists are based on numbers assigned by players, but what I'm saying is how accurate are the numbers when those numbers are so arguable? How important is the final number you end up with when you add all the numbers? If that's what determines what tier a character is in, how important is it when they're based on arbitrary numbers and don't speak on how important the matchup they dominate is? I'm not saying tiers are bad or don't exist, but I think a lot of players (especially new ones) put too much stock in them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
ZerodotJander posted:I've heard Damdai say something similar to this, the way I understood him is that it's not so much "tiers don't exist" as that Super Turbo is a game where every character has an answer to everything. Well, that doesn't matter. Over a large sample size, having less answers instead of none is still going to prove some characters had advantageous matchups. edit- And SBO is the definition of low sample size so the results of SBO are kind of meaningless statistically.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:This is the worst part about it to me because top players debate match ups all day. So a second ago you didn't know that it was based on top players opinions and now it's the worst part of it? Did tier lists kill your parents or something?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:40
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:I think a lot of players put too much stock in them. Who? If you understand that a tier list is "a shorthand estimate of who is good against who" then you can't put too much stock in that. The ones who put too much stock in it are the people who protest too much against them. Just so you know, you are a part of the fighting game community and you have input in these things too. Matchup ratings is something people talk about all the time especially in the first 6-12 months a game is out, and it is a fun, open, running conversation the community has together. There were serious debates on SSF4 tier lists- but less than you would think. The vast majority of the best players had very similar feelings on the matchups. You are a player too! You are part of this discussion! If you think that the community is wrong about a matchup, and have a compelling reason, that becomes the matchup rating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:42
|
|
|
ZerodotJander posted:I've heard Damdai say something similar to this, the way I understood him is that it's not so much "tiers don't exist" as that Super Turbo is a game where every character has an answer to everything. This is what I meant, but I heard it in a video John Rambo made after SBO talking about difference in ST in the US and Japan etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:44
|
|
|
Ono and Harada, BFFs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pnf7Ugux0k4
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:44
|
|
|
40 OZ posted:Well, that doesn't matter. Nobody who actually plays fighting games as opposed to pressing buttons and watching guys on screen do stuff is confused about the idea that matchups exist. The point is that just because a character is low tier and has bad matchups doesn't mean that you can't win with him, it just means you have to work harder. Everybody who argues about whether tier lists are dumb or not is usually just someone who doesn't understand the difference between "this character has better matchups and better tools, so he is a better character and easier to win with" and "this character is objectively better so don't play that other character". The second statement is good advice for new players, but it's not some sort of intrinsic belief held by everybody who understands that tiers exist. vvv Ehh, one of the first tier lists I ever saw was a chart from Arcadia that ranked ST tiers based on adding up matchup points. ZerodotJander fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:45
|
|
|
The conflation of "tier list" with "matchup chart" is a recent phenomenon I think.ZerodotJander posted:I've heard Damdai say something similar to this, the way I understood him is that it's not so much "tiers don't exist" as that Super Turbo is a game where every character has an answer to everything. That's weird, I think this is way less true of ST than many other games, and it's a better game for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:46
|
|
|
40 OZ posted:Who? If you understand that a tier list is "a shorthand estimate of who is good against who" then you can't put too much stock in that. I'm aware. What do you think I'm doing? All I've been typing is my opinion. I've been in the fighting game scene for 10 (edit: longer than that..gently caress I'm old) years now, EVO2k2 was my first national and I have only missed 2. I'm lucky enough to be in a high competition area. Tiers are interesting because they make discussion, but I hate tier lists because I've seen new players quote tier lists without trying to contribute anything new to them. I think it makes people too dogmatic and generally less interested in trying to come up with their own opinion because they think the tier lists have set everything in stone. That's the part of the article I agree with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:50
|
|
|
ZerodotJander posted:Nobody who actually plays fighting games as opposed to pressing buttons and watching guys on screen do stuff is confused about the idea that matchups exist. The point is that just because a character is low tier and has bad matchups doesn't mean that you can't win with him, it just means you have to work harder. "Working harder" is exactly correct. That means the same thing. We just don't take those things into account on the tier list. We don't take into account how much sleep the guy got the night before, if his controller is in good operating condition, etc. If two top players are working equally as hard, Ryu will beat Chun Li more times than she will beat him, over a large sample size. ZerodotJander posted:Everybody who argues about whether tier lists are dumb or not is usually just someone who doesn't understand the difference between "this character has better matchups and better tools, so he is a better character and easier to win with" and "this character is objectively better so don't play that other character". The second statement is good advice for new players, but it's not some sort of intrinsic belief held by everybody who understands that tiers exist. Right. If you don't have any 3-7 matchups you can more or less forget that the tier list exists. If you do, you had better take notice or your capacity to win tournaments will be far less than it could be. ZerodotJander posted:vvv Ehh, one of the first tier lists I ever saw was a chart from Arcadia that ranked ST tiers based on adding up matchup points. It is a shorthand of a shorthand. Like the Honda example, yes he is a great character, but you will need to consult the matchup chart that serves as the source of the tier list to really see what is going on there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:51
|
|
|
Gamest Mook posted:The conflation of "tier list" with "matchup chart" is a recent phenomenon I think. I think it's pretty true in ST outside of very specific matchups, like E. Honda vs motion fireballer, and maybe Cammy vs E. Honda. Most games where characters have answers to everything, have them through universal systems. In ST, every character seems to have a normal or a special to help them deal with anything starting from a neutral situation, as long as you know the matchup, know the spacing, etc. Of course, if you're in a disadvantageous situation like being knocked down in the corner, sometimes there's nothing you can do. But, in general, it really does seem to me that if you know the game well enough, every gameplan has a counter. 40 OZ posted:"Working harder" is exactly correct. That means the same thing. We just don't take those things into account on the tier list. We don't take into account how much sleep the guy got the night before, if his controller is in good operating condition, etc. ZerodotJander fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:53
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:I'm aware. What do you think I'm doing? All I've been typing is my opinion. Yeah, but that is not the opinion I'm talking about. Instead of philosophical complaining about the tier list existing, you go: "Hey this matchup is considered 4-6 that's bullshit, these top players are dumbheads! Here is an option select that takes away all this guy's options on wakeup and owns him free." 2 months later, everyone is winning games with this new revelation and the matchup rating Gets More Accurate. There might even be a shakeup on the Tier List! 40 OZ fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:55
|
|
|
Shadow Ninja 64 posted:Ono and Harada, BFFs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pnf7Ugux0k4 So I guess this means Haggar is in SFxT then? Or am I a dumbass and missed the confirmation beforehand?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
Tier lists are nice for identifying trouble matchups for your character, and for having a general overview of what characters take more work to compete with, but it can be annoying when people blindly quote tier lists and repeat poo poo until it becomes like groupthink. I'm tired of people saying poo poo like "fei long is bottom tier (vanilla sf4)", "t. hawk beats the twins", and stuff like that that. When the game is new, particularly when it's a rarely-played character, most matchup poo poo is based on gut reactions and theorycrafting, and yet people repeat it and cling to it like gospel. Really annoying.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
ZerodotJander posted:I think it's pretty true in ST outside of very specific matchups, like E. Honda vs motion fireballer, and maybe Cammy vs E. Honda. There's a few really lopsided matchups in ST. Honda does really well against non fireball characters and really poorly against the ones that do have fireballs. Honda/Gief is like 10-0 Gief/Sim is also really difficult, but you can still thread the needle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 19:58
|
|
|
40 OZ posted:Yeah, but that is not the opinion I'm talking about. Instead of philosophical complaining about the tier list existing, you go: Real mature. I'm saying the importance of tier lists are conflated because they aren't accurate for every player and they're bad because they have a detrimental effect on new players. Also that top players are dumbheads. You at least got that part right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
Mochiballs posted:I'm saying the importance of tier lists are conflated because they aren't accurate for every player and they're bad because they have a detrimental effect on new players. Tier lists are only considered Real Ultimate Knowledge by bad players who are bad and you shouldn't be listening to them anyway?? Also I don't think you know what conflated means
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
Bovineicide posted:So I guess this means Haggar is in SFxT then? Or am I a dumbass and missed the confirmation beforehand? No, he's just part of the cinematic, I think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 21:33 |
|
|
Mochiballs posted:they aren't accurate for every player They aren't accurate for Jesus Christ, an OG Israeli player with ridiculous yomi. Every matchup was 10-0. Mochiballs posted:Real mature. The only thing i see from new players about tier lists is this same boo-hoo'ing that they exist. I totally agree that they can be inaccurate. Does anyone ~REALLY~ know if the Gen-Gouken matchup is 6-4? Probably not. But that is 'our' best guess because nobody plays them and we don't have a good sample size on top Gen-Gouken action. 'Our' meaning everyone in this thread and fighting game fans around the world. :P edit- Does nobody actually enjoy winning bad matchups anymore? It's fun. If you beat Chun in 3S with Sean, don't get sassy about if the tier list was accurate or not. Enjoy it, you earned it! 
40 OZ fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Aug 31, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2011 20:09
|
|