What's new

MKT N64 Tier List Discussion

Tim Static

Adminerator
Lead Moderator
Darthlord CRC said:
talk smak,what ever..its just that the game doesnt play against itself

and i never said shock was wrong...so get off the nuts!!
You didnt say he was wrong, but you didnt completely agree, which is stupid, because their is no if's, and's or but's.

And again, type right, ho. :idea:
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
Founder
O.G.
The tier list in a sense is almost designed as if two computers with all the available knowledge about a game and the characters played against eachother. Since we can't do this, we scrutanize tournament results, and specific strengths and weaknesses of characters to determine as closely as possible what would happen if two perfect players went against eachother. With a game like UMK3, the tournament atmosphere can be a lot friendlier and you won't always see players picking Kabal all day. When the level of players gets high enough in a tournament situation you will however see players picking him and Human Smoke, and getting further in tournaments than they would even with characters they are good with.

If it breaks down to the level of someone vs the level of another and when you add that in, the tier list has less direct influence on the outcome. If you give characters a ratio depending on who uses them, from 1 to 10, a ratio 5 Kabal will be able to beat a ratio 10 Sheeva, meaning a person who has only half mastered Kabal can take advantage of enough basic strats with him to be her, a less capable character. I might take a R4 Kabal for a Sheeva to get wins in. Once you get below that you are talking players who don't know what they are doing at all. Of course these numbers might even still be exaggerations but to get the point across, the tier list matters.

In more popular games, the tier list is abused more because players want to win and it gets to a point where you know others will pick the best in the game, so you have to as well. In MvC2, if you pick Team Shoto Vs Magneto Sentinel Cable, no matter how good you are, you will most likely lose to even a moderately skilled player. In SF3 Chun Li is often seen as the top contender along with Ken, occassionally like UMK3 you will see people break out the random wild card characters but more often then not, the finals are a Chun Li player and a Ken player, or maybe even just two Chun Li players.

When I played Joe at ECC12.5 we both used Human Smoke in the last match because it was in fact the deciding match for first place. I could have picked Kabal and maybe had an easier time, but since I knew he'd pick Human Smoke anyway, I could go with the character I was more comfortable with but have to put more a little effort forth to win if I won at all.
 
Tier lists give you some idea of how strong a character character is. I feel tier lists are very opinionated. I like to put characters in 4 categories; God tier "over powered", top tier "powerful", mid tier "average", low tier "weak". My explanation is extremely simplified. I feel it's to hard to list characters from lets say rank 1-20 because it will come down to things like, player skill, counter characters, mind games est. In my opinion, it's pointless to have a tier ranking system from best to worst. Because no "one" player is perfect at a fighting gaming, therefore could not play a character perfectly. Everyone makes mistakes, it does not matter if you are best in the world.

I've played fighting games for many years, as we all have and I have had many arguments over tier lists. I got sick of arguing "He is rank 8 and she is rank 7." So that's why I just use the 4 categories, makes it a little more easy to group characters tier wise. This method will give you a general idea of a characters level versus another.
 
Sir-Jabs-Alot said:
Tier lists give you some idea of how strong a character character is. I feel tier lists are very opinionated. I like to put characters in 4 categories; God tier "over powered", top tier "powerful", mid tier "average", low tier "weak". My explanation is extremely simplified. I feel it's to hard to list characters from lets say rank 1-20 because it will come down to things like, player skill, counter characters, mind games est. In my opinion, it's pointless to have a tier ranking system from best to worst. Because no "one" player is perfect at a fighting gaming, therefore could not play a character perfectly. Everyone makes mistakes, it does not matter if you are best in the world.

I've played fighting games for many years, as we all have and I have had many arguments over tier lists. I got sick of arguing "He is rank 8 and she is rank 7." So that's why I just use the 4 categories, makes it a little more easy to group characters tier wise. This method will give you a general idea of a characters level versus another.
Very well said

i agree with you it depends on skill of the person playing

:arrow: :)
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
Founder
O.G.
The tier list doesn't depend on the skill of two specific people playing in one match, it is the combined effort of many players over time and cross referenced information. Whether or not those players use everything that is available to them doesn't change how the characters fall against eachother in terms of effectiveness. A tier list is something that changes less and less over time, and at this point, it's pretty definite.

It really seems often that I see people try and discuss a tier list, and don't actually understand what it is or why it's there, and then when it is explained to them, more often then not the explanation is ignored and they continue to think how they want, and never get it. It effectively combines statistics and probablity into something you can almost put money on, with a margin for error. If someone discovers something new that can help a character defeat others more easily, his tier level might go up, unless of course it only helps him defeat characters who were already below him.

In the case of Reptile, he has had the biggest move on the tier list in the last several years. People are starting to use him and his strats have become more acknowledged. That's another big part of a tier list. If most players who pick up Reptile can't master his juggles or his zoning, that means he's too hard to use, and ultimately not an effective character. Since this is kind of a 50/50 situation for him, he is still ranked high, however has the potential to go higher still.

There are enough people who use Kabal and Human Smoke to cement their spot in the top 2, and comparatively, Reptile's effort to win is so much greater than the others even though they are all in the top 5. A character like Cyrax can perform 90-100% mid screen combos if you can set them up and perform them, which might make people say ""Wow that should make him top tier" but how often do you see these combos happen? In the hands of an amazing Cyrax player, you might see a 71% combo from time to time, but that's pushing it, he's just too difficult for a person to use. Getting 52% with Reptile consistently is a lot easier than getting 52% with Cyrax, not only in performing the combos, but getting to the combos.

For a tier list you can't just say "infinites will win" (ie: Kung Lao universal infinites > everyone) because characters being used at their best doesn't mean performing an infinite once you get it, it includes getting to that infinite which is far more complex math and reasoning than I would care to have a computer look at. A computer might look at that way, but there's a chance the infinite will never be possible to perform, so it is as if it doesn't exist to begin with. It's harder for Kung to get the infinite on Kabal or Human Smoke being played at their highest capacity before Kung is defeated, or, there are less opportunities against them.
 
I look at it this way. A Tier list gives a player a general idea of where a characters skill stands in a particular game. I completely understand that a tier list is based on the strengths and weaknesses of a character and not player skill. I'm simply saying, a players skill level factors into game play heavily.

So what you are saying is. If we put 2 extremely skilled UMK3 players together and had them play 10 matches, player A uses Kano and player B uses uses Nightwolf. According to the UMK3 tier list here at umk.com player A will win the set?

I'm not saying anyone is wrong about there thoughts on tier lists. I respect that, everyone is entitled to there own opinion. This is just my opinion on the subject. You can never ever be 100% accurate with a tier list and tier lists should never be set in stone.

Shock your explanation of a tier list is very well put. I completely understand your points of view. But, I will always stand by my thoughts on tier lists. :D
 
Shock said:
A character like Cyrax can perform 90-100% mid screen combos if you can set them up and perform them, which might make people say ""Wow that should make him top tier" but how often do you see these combos happen? In the hands of an amazing Cyrax player, you might see a 71% combo from time to time, but that's pushing it, he's just too difficult for a person to use. Getting 52% with Reptile consistently is a lot easier than getting 52% with Cyrax, not only in performing the combos, but getting to the combos.
I understand but, when you're saying "he's just too difficult for a person to use." That comes down to a particular players skill level and not the potential of the character. So are your tier lists based on "character strengths and weaknesses" or "player skill level / character strengths and weaknesses".

Edit: I agree 100% just because a particular players has an infinite, does not make them ranked 1 in a game.
 

MKF30

Fujin and Ermac for MK 11
I totally agree with Shock on the tier list thing and the Cyrax point is a great one because I use him a lot and well.

In fact the other day I played a guy named Honduras, pretty good Ermac play and beat him with Cyrax. Do you know how difficult that is?

I wanted that match up though because one thing I'm positive of is this, if a lower tier character in the right hands can take out a higher tier in high level play that will definitely improve your game with Cyrax(in this case)

As annoying as Jax is, Cyrax is my Jax killer where at times believe it or not a good Jax player I've noticed has given my Ermac a hard time or U.Sub so go figure? lol

As for tier lists, I believe they have and always will be judged/based by majority of players that play a fighting game at high level. This is with every Mk game, this is with every fighting game.
 

dreemernj

Ambassador
Sir-Jabs-Alot said:
Shock said:
A character like Cyrax can perform 90-100% mid screen combos if you can set them up and perform them, which might make people say ""Wow that should make him top tier" but how often do you see these combos happen? In the hands of an amazing Cyrax player, you might see a 71% combo from time to time, but that's pushing it, he's just too difficult for a person to use. Getting 52% with Reptile consistently is a lot easier than getting 52% with Cyrax, not only in performing the combos, but getting to the combos.
I understand but, when you're saying "he's just too difficult for a person to use." That comes down to a particular players skill level and not the potential of the character. So are your tier lists based on "character strengths and weaknesses" or "player skill level / character strengths and weaknesses".

Edit: I agree 100% just because a particular players has an infinite, does not make them ranked 1 in a game.

I think the best way to look at it is if a character is more difficult to use that counts as a character weakness. Player's skill is involved with how well any character can be used by an individual regardless of whether that character is difficult or easy to use. But, how difficult a character is to use compared to the other characters is a trait of the character and something that is independent of who is playing.
 

Shock

Administrator
Administrator
Founder
O.G.
Variables in gameplay might even make using Cyrax's strengths difficult for a computer controlled character, in other words, a master level preprogrammed computer controlled Cyrax won't be able to beat a good Kabal controlled by a human and this where a ratio concept falls into play. It is out of the hands of the skill of any one person to determine how good a single character is. After 12 years, if only 1 in 100 players is good with Cyrax and 50 out of 100 are good with Kabal, that means Kabal is a more effective character than Cyrax based on some kind of mathematics.
 
I agree with all of you guys tottally. When I make a tier list I like to group characters in the catagories I listed before. It's just my way of doing things.

Hehe, to be honest I was out drinking last night. I'm not really sure why I posted in the first place.
 

MKF30

Fujin and Ermac for MK 11
Ehh, I've noticed counterpicking is popular with players who often struggle to win :p


In a tournament personally, there should be the rule of "take turns" this is how we worked it in the 3D MK's back when MKD and MKA was hot a year+ ago.

I think this should be a rule added to future UMK3 tournaments personally....
 

dreemernj

Ambassador
MKF30 said:
Ehh, I've noticed counterpicking is popular with players who often struggle to win :p


In a tournament personally, there should be the rule of "take turns" this is how we worked it in the 3D MK's back when MKD and MKA was hot a year+ ago.

I think this should be a rule added to future UMK3 tournaments personally....
Really? I've never seen a problem with counter picking. It just seems like part of the game.
 

MKF30

Fujin and Ermac for MK 11
dreemernj said:
MKF30 said:
Ehh, I've noticed counterpicking is popular with players who often struggle to win :p


In a tournament personally, there should be the rule of "take turns" this is how we worked it in the 3D MK's back when MKD and MKA was hot a year+ ago.

I think this should be a rule added to future UMK3 tournaments personally....
Really? I've never seen a problem with counter picking. It just seems like part of the game.
Yeah, perhaps it's because I've had a lot of bad experiences with "counter picking" on the 3D mk's so eventually back when the good players made tournaments, there was a "take turns policy rule" this way it was fair since in the newer MK's it's like the UMK3 DS version with NO select screen time limit so there were always feuds with "people dancing on the screen, waiting to see who their foe picks" lots of "chicken" going on..which was annoying after a while.

It's just a suggestion, I'm not saying you guys have to do it. If I were running a tourney, I'd enforce this rule.

Those tourneys also went to first to 7, so it was pretty much who reached 7 first or best 4 out of 7 like in baseball, hockey and B-ball playoffs.
 
The only counter pick i consider a "counter pick" is when you pick a juggling charcter (Ermac), and your opponent picks someone like sheeva, or shang. I don't mind it though.