What's new

Do you agree with this statement?

Do you agree with the statement?


  • Total voters
    111
Ranking characters is meaningless as long as the human skill level is high enough.

I've never understood why people rank characters when all it takes is practice and skill.

Discuss.
 
Say you could give skill a Number. Say Im a 10.

Say I play someone with a 10 rank skill as well.

Say I use Kabal

Say he uses Sheeva

I win.
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
There are certain properties certain characters have that make them easier to win with.
 
So even if that person is Sheeva and knows Kabal backwards and forwards, even if they play against someone else of their calibur, they still lose?

I say a character is only as good as the person using it. Regardless of what "qualities" a character posesses.

Like we say in the Marines: "It's the dope behind the rifle. Not the rifle itself that makes it deadly."
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
It takes an incredibly off balance player skill level in order for Sheeva to beat Kabal.

This has been discussed before I'm sure, but let's say we use a scale from 1-10, with 10 being the strongest, you would probably need a level 10 Sheeva to consistently beat a level 5 Kabal, and that might even be generous.
 
Think of it in terms of percentages, there's no absolutes. Like, if Player A and B are both of equal skill, then Player A's Kabal has, say, a 95% chance of beating Player B's Sheeva. Flukes happen, and there's no real way to rank player skill in such absolutes (They might be far better with certain characters but weaker with others, etc.), but that's the general idea. You can kill someone at 20 paces with a .38, or with a hatchet, but the odds are in your favor with the gun.
 

RoGE

Noob
Tier list won't matter that much in very balanced games like UMK3 but in games like MK2 and MK3 they would because they have god tier characters.
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
rzp make your sig pic about 75% it's current size to fit the forum at 1024X768
 
QuiGonZel said:
Ranking characters is meaningless as long as the human skill level is high enough.

I've never understood why people rank characters when all it takes is practice and skill.

Discuss.
I was thinking about this earlier. Look at The Pro Julian. And look at KaBill. From the Matches I've seen Julian uses Sektor and Bill uses Kabal. Sektor takes MUCH more skill to use than Kabal. Like Shock says, If you measure it with Numbers It takes a 10 Skill with Sheeva to beat even a 5 Skill with Kabal based on effort. Sektor Needs to give ALOT more Effort and the player needs to have alot more skill than the Kabal. If you want to say Julian and Bill are at the same level of skill using those characters, then if Julian were to suddenly use Someone like H smoke he should Own Bill easily. But he uses Sektor so it IS about Character.
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
In the case of Julian vs Bill, you might also have to take into account these two guys have been playing eachother off and on for like 10 years. This doesn't necessarily fall into the idea of "See, it's a matter of the person who uses the character.." situation because it's so specific. To get an idea of the actual character's effectiveness it is more important to look at the "people who use the characters well" meaning, the player pool, because obviously, if no one uses a certain character still even 12 years after a game has been released, that character probably sucks in general.

There are in some cases, people who use the lesser effective characters to their highest potential, but they still struggle against the high tier characters. These two know how the other plays even beyond standard character tactics, and this is where the whole effectiveness thing comes into play. I've seen Bill defeat Julian's Sektor with ease, but I've also seen Julian beat Bill's Kabal consistently. I'd say Bill's constant attacking is his only weakness, but I really only know a few people who can beat him.
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
So I could beat him in the finals due to how much smack he was talking about my skillz! :twisted: There was no money on the line or anything so it didn't matter.
 
What I find in most games is that this statement tends to be at least somewhat true with the top to upper-mid characters...but once you go below that then the matchups can trump skill.

Of course, even an upper-mid character may have a matchup or two that can't consistently be overcome (Zangief vs. Sagat in vanilla SF4).
 
Tier list won't matter that much in very balanced games like UMK3 but in games like MK2 and MK3 they would because they have god tier characters
UMK3 is balanced?Woah Kung Lao, Ermac, Stryker, Reptile, Human Smoke, Kabal, even Shang Tsung has infinties. MK2 and MK3 are FAR more balanced then UMK3