Who is really the best? No one.

[foolmasterz]

This is what i think. Everybody has their own ideas about who is the best characters in the game. I've seen people put kirby over Ganondorf, or say Snake is the worst player. now, i do believe that their are certain characters that REALLY suck. like kirby, or jiggs. but thats only because i don't (A) know how do use them and (B) don't use them well. How can these characters be better than another one? Some people say toon link is better that Link. I strongly disagree with that because i am a long time Link player, and have never been beaten by toon link. i get a little bit annoyed when people say things like toon link is better.
But these are just opinions. basically, i think who ever you use as a main character is the one you think is the best because your good with that character. These guys are no better than any of the others. thats why this game is so great. as long as you have the skill, and the brains, no one character is better than the rest.

 

[whoady4shoady]

Good post, and I strongly agree.

 

[Nybb]

This is full of epic loss. As soon as you play somebody besides the CPUs and your little sister you will realize that all characters are not created equal.

Not that that's bad; really, it's impossible to have perfect balance. You just have to get over it. I personally enjoy playing the lower end characters for fun.

 

[Mann]

I strongly disagree. People have their own idea of who is great and what not, but characters don't change because people say so.

You can not just say one character is better than another just because you've never lost to a certain character. That could mean your opponent's skill wasn't that great. When you are typing this out, you weren't thinking about why tier lists were made in the first place. Why so many people played Marth/Falco/Fox/Shiek in melee to win tournament play.

If you were to take 2 equally skilled players, the one who chooses the character with the most advantages over the other character would have a higher chance of winning.

The world doesn't just work because people just say it does.

 

[lain]

i didn't read your post,

you're wrong.

 

[Carouselambra]

I have realized something, and rather start a new post, I guess I'll place it here cause it's kind of on topic.

Tiers have a serious flaw that I think few take into consideration. This would be the rock/paper/scissors effect where character A plays better against B, character B plays better against C, and character C plays better against A.

I do believe in tiers, since any variation in character abilities has to lead to some that are overall better. In this scenario though, saying Link is better than Toon Link could indeed be true (prly not), but apparently Toon Link is the overall better character (or thats the general perception).

Question is, how do you properly account for this effect?

 

[Mann]

Threads like these are becoming pointless to post in. Especially if the OP doesn't feel like replying back. Not that they have to.

 

[replicate]

But these are just opinions. basically, i think who ever you use as a main character is the one you think is the best because your good with that character.

Tell gimpyfish that bowser is the best....

 

[Nybb]

I have realized something, and rather start a new post, I guess I'll place it here cause it's kind of on topic.

Tiers have a serious flaw that I think few take into consideration. This would be the rock/paper/scissors effect where character A plays better against B, character B plays better against C, and character C plays better against A.

I do believe in tiers, since any variation in character abilities has to lead to some that are overall better. In this scenario though, saying Link is better than Toon Link could indeed be true (prly not), but apparently Toon Link is the overall better character (or thats the general perception).

Question is, how do you properly account for this effect?

I sort of see where you're coming from, and I've read other posts saying similar things, but I think the logic behind this idea is slightly flawed.

I'll do my best to make my counter-argument make sense:

You are seeing this:
Toon Link may beat Link, but Link beats DeDeDe, and Dedede beats Toon Link.

And concluding this:
Toon Link cannot be the best, or as good as people are saying he is.

I am aware that this chain of characters is false. It's only because I'd rather use actual characters in an example as opposed to saying generic terms like "Character A."

The problem is that you are approaching this like a mathematical problem. You see the above chain and conclude that T Link is actually not any better than the others.

If you saw this math problem:

Wendy is taller than Sally, but Sally is taller than Rick. Rick is taller than Wendy.

You would correctly conclude:

Wendy cannot actually be taller than Sally; the problem makes no sense.

The thing is, though, that tallness is a one-dimensional thing. You are either taller, or you are not. "Goodness," as in the individual strength of characters in Brawl, is not so linear, not so black-and-white.

The other key difference between the elementary problem and the chain of Smash characters is this: Only two characters battle at a time. The fact that in our example chain, Dedede beats Toon Link, has absolutely no bearing on a T Link vs. Link match. The fact is that T Link trounces Link regardless of what Link can do to other characters. Therefore, the Rock-Paper-Scissors aspect you are bringing up does not come into play on a match-by-match basis. It can in a multi-match set, but that is a different discussion altogether.

Tier positionings are based on the character in question vs. any other character (and other factors such as tourney results, but that is not part of this discussion). The question is, which characters have the most favourable match-ups? The match-ups of those secondary characters with eachother has no impact on the tier placement of the primary character.

I hope that makes sense.

 

[Bodknocks]

I have realized something, and rather start a new post, I guess I'll place it here cause it's kind of on topic.

Tiers have a serious flaw that I think few take into consideration. This would be the rock/paper/scissors effect where character A plays better against B, character B plays better against C, and character C plays better against A.

I do believe in tiers, since any variation in character abilities has to lead to some that are overall better. In this scenario though, saying Link is better than Toon Link could indeed be true (prly not), but apparently Toon Link is the overall better character (or thats the general perception).

Question is, how do you properly account for this effect?

Welcome to the metagame.

It's simple game theory, really. Because there is diversity, there will be a "best character", even if we don't know it yet. Therefore, the character who has the most potential to succeed is the best character. For example: Even if Marth has a huge chance of losing to Yoshi, if Marth has a huge chance of winning against every other character, he'll have the highest potential gain (assuming Yoshi has more than one bad match up). Marth becomes #1 on the tier because he has the highest gain, regardless of the fact that Yoshi has an advantage over him.

It's not entirely like RPS because you don't have three choices, you have 36, and some of them are clearly better than others. It's a complicated process, but the odds are astronomical that Brawl comprises of a roster where all the character have an equal amount of good match ups to bad match ups. That's not even taking into account things like speed, recovery, lag, and other oddball factors like Lucario getting stronger at higher damage percentages. Therefore, once again, a tier will most definitely exist.

I think you've got the right ideas, you just don't understand what the tier tells you. Also, you're on the right track to understanding the metagame, which I believe is what you are now seeing as the "flaw" of tiers. Trust me, it's not.

 

[Rapid_Assassin]

No one knows who the best is yet. There are characters that appear to be the best (usually those that people have the most trouble with) but that will probably change when people get better at the game. There is a "best" and a "worst" because of variety, but the gap isn't so great that any character is completely unplayable at this point.

 

[_Slick_]

THAT'S IT! My Toon Link verses your Link. NOW!

Nah seriously my Internet is laggy (I'm in Aussie).

 

[Carouselambra]

thanks for the replies. i think i could have worded my post better but i see what both nybb and bodknocks are sayin.

have you ever seen that poster which has an extended RPS with 64 items? i should have compared it more to that. in that scenario they all have equal likehood of winning, which i know isn't the case for brawl. what would be cool is if someone develope a web similar to that one for brawl showing who has the overall advantage in each possible matchup. prly tough to do, but not implausible. then from that you could make a tier.

 

[lain]

Melee example:

Fox can beat Peach. Peach can beat Falco. Falco can beat Fox.

Fox might get countered by Falco due to Falco's abilities that counter Fox's weight and maneuverability, but Fox is still the better character on the tiers because his abilities are better then everyone else's in total.

 

[RednaXale]

Well I think Wolf is pretty high up there.
I can't play Jigglypuff or Mario anymore.
And as for Kirby he is much better than before.

 

[Corigames]

I think you were absolutely right, up until here.

These guys are no better than any of the others. thats why this game is so great. as long as you have the skill, and the brains, no one character is better than the rest.

Inherently, no game is perfect. Not all the characters are balanced. It's a FACT. If someone made the perfect game, I think it would be recognized across the world. Saying the game gives equal opportunity to all characters is naive. Certain characters will always be better than the others. The problem is, right now, there hasn't been several national competitions to show which of these characters preforms the best against people from everywhere. Out of your friends, you may be best with Dedede. Out of someone else's, Kirby. Who is right? Neither, until you fight! Same is for how tiers are constructed. You look at who wins tournaments abroad.

So, until we have major competitions, it will be hard to tell which is the, agreeable, best. And trust me, one will be.

 

[lavamage]

Let me shorten up what you said, or, what I think you said.

"No character can get better until someone learns how to play them"

This is like how chu made the ice climbers into #7 on the teir list.


I agree that we cannot identify the best characters, however, I think it is easy to point out the worst. Characters like Jiggs and Dorf are not doing very well, similar to pichu in melee. I think your post is alright, but your evidence is non-existent

If you have played on wifi-I doubt you won every time, and if you play a good Toon Link, I don't think you will win.

 

[wtZzz]

At this point, it is not about who is best

It is about who is the easiest to use. As current low tier characters develop, the rankings will change.

ToonLink, MetaKnight, Pit, etc, are simply easier to use, they have great movesets and priorities. So 2 or 3 weeks in now, we say they currently seem the strongest because their most basic strategies are the quickest to pick up and understand. If a player wants success RIGHT NOW, it is smart for him to pick one of those characters. If a player wants success in the future, he may want to train on a more balanced or more difficult character, so that he may learn much more.

Another problem is that if you know someone is going to main... say Pit. It is clear you should pick a character to counter Pit's advantages. Main 3 characters for this reason. Have a response to toon links non-laser projectiles, have a response for Pit's arrows, find a character that can avoid MetaKnight.

Use GW against pit. Capture 3 arrows in the bucket, get a quick kill.
Use Zelda, Samus, ROB, Fox, or Falco against Toon Link
Use Sheik, Sonic, captain falcon, or diddy against metaknight

By only having one main, you are allowing yourself to have a weakness. OR, you can just main one of the 3 "top tier" characters I mentioned above LOL

 

[Corigames]

While I agree that having a great cover base of diverse characters helps you win tournaments, I don't think it is a necessity. I believe, and I know that it is completely biased because this is how I work, that if you can take one thing and make it the best, it is better to have that than several good things. Now, I know it is possible to be great with several characters, but I find it best to stick with one character and bring them to their full potential with your hands and mind.

Once again, that's my feelings.

 

[Sculelos]

No one knows who the best is yet but Toon Link, Pit and Metaknight seem to be very popular. I personally play Wolf, Caption Falcon, Gannondorf, Link and Sonic frequently and seem to do decently with all of them.

 

[foolmasterz]

i still don't see why everyones loves toon link so much. i can't play him worth a penny. but i can beat him every time using my link. (That is, when im fighting CPUs) ive only come across one toon link player on With anyone, and i defeated him with ease.

 

[Mann]

i still don't see why everyones loves toon link so much. i can't play him worth a penny. but i can beat him every time using my link. (That is, when im fighting CPUs) ive only come across one toon link player on With anyone, and i defeated him with ease.

So you don't know why everyone loves toon link based on the limited experience you've had so far? There's videos on youtube all over the place for you to see.

 

[LouisLeGros]

I have realized something, and rather start a new post, I guess I'll place it here cause it's kind of on topic.

Tiers have a serious flaw that I think few take into consideration. This would be the rock/paper/scissors effect where character A plays better against B, character B plays better against C, and character C plays better against A.

I do believe in tiers, since any variation in character abilities has to lead to some that are overall better. In this scenario though, saying Link is better than Toon Link could indeed be true (prly not), but apparently Toon Link is the overall better character (or thats the general perception).

Question is, how do you properly account for this effect?

base it on tournament results

 

[raydinneed]

characters that REALLY suck. like kirby, or jiggs.

The only char who sucks if you don't main him is ganondorf, if you can't play with jiggs or kirby you're baed

 

[_Slick_]

i still don't see why everyones loves toon link so much.

Because he's awesome, AND he was the star of Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass. >_>

i can't play him worth a penny.

And that means he sucks?

but i can beat him every time using my link. (That is, when im fighting CPUs)

And may I ask what level these CPU's are on? In fact THAT doesn't even matter, since I can beat Lv. 9's with Ganondorf.

ive only come across one toon link player on With anyone, and i defeated him with ease.

That sentence failed once you said "With Anyone".

 

[foolmasterz]

ok Slick, i can argue this with you.
first point, eh.
second point: Just because I can't use him doesnt mean that he sucks. i never said that. it means I suck when using him. again proving my point that it takes skills, not just the character you play with to be good.
Third point: i always fight on lvl 9. and now your saying the Ganon sucks? Skills, not teirs my friend. i have done, and continue to use him in "for fun matches", and im pretty decent using him.
Last point: again, i keep hearing that toon link is so great. oh, hes the best right? i fight a dumb little noob, and i win "wiht ease". soooo again, my skills beat him...even tho as everybody seems to think, toon link beats pretty much everyone else ALL the time. ERRRGGG.

 

[ARX-7 Arbalest]

it depends on who the player is, ive seen people that suck with wario and others that **** with him

although i do miss pichu lol

 

[Mann]

Third point: i always fight on lvl 9. and now your saying the Ganon sucks? Skills, not teirs my friend. i have done, and continue to use him in "for fun matches", and im pretty decent using him.
Last point: again, i keep hearing that toon link is so great. oh, hes the best right? i fight a dumb little noob, and i win "wiht ease". soooo again, my skills beat him...even tho as everybody seems to think, toon link beats pretty much everyone else ALL the time. ERRRGGG.

People usually don't relate fighting computers to skill.

I still don't think you get it. Toon Link has higher potential to have an easier time against other players. Of COURSE you are going to win against a noob. That's a given, buddy. But if you were to take two equally skilled players, the character with the most advantages/least disadvantages would win the majority of the time. Just because you won against won noob, doesn't mean it sets what you should think about the rest of the community.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=aLyGB3tgV-w

 

[Resident_Smash_Genius]

TRFQ

Seriously, they are.

 

[:034:]

Toon Link IS better than Link. It's fact, bro.

Toon Link beats Link in these area's:
- Smaller target.
- Faster on the ground.
- Faster attacks.
- Better recovery due to higher jumps.
- Better with spacing.
- Less lag.
- Boomerang hits on the way back.
- Short Hop Double Arrow creates a good approach.
- Bigger bomb blast radius.
- Some attacks do more percentual damage.
- Dair spike.

Link beats Toon Link in these area's:
- Better tether recovery.
- More knockback.
- More range.
- Most attacks do more percentual damage.

Toon Link has so much more over Link. Link isn't bad, but Toon Link is just much better.