Skedar70
Noob
Hey guys,
I have been thinking about this for a while because it doesn't make sense to me. The general notion is that tier placement should be based on number of winning match ups vs losing match ups yet match up numbers are very subjective. What a person believes is a 6-4 winning match up for a character, another person believes is a 4-6 losing match up.
Recently there was a discussion on the Kitana vs Tanya (Pyromancer) MU some believed it was in Kitana's favor while other believe it was in Tanya's favor, in the end Tanya ended up mopping the Kitana's and this didn't change anything on their opinion they still believed the MU was in Kitana's favor or even and that the Tanya player was better. So the match numbers in the end didn't prove anything and the opinion was based mostly on the idea that Kitana does have the proper tools to even up the match up if used correctly.
Now people say that tools isn't the way of determining the tier placement of a character. But why is this?
Its easier to agree on what are good tools and bad tools. Proof of this is that people who play the same characters usually use the same strings, staggers, specials while avoid using the bad tools. So a tool being good or bad is not as subjective as MU numbers.
Also, tools are actually what determine if a MU is good or bad. For example a character without any tools to get in or out of Subzero's clone set ups is considered a losing matchup against subzero.
Its not possible for a character to have great tools and be garbage, and it's also very likely that a character with very few decent tools is bad character.
So why is tier placement based on MU instead of the set of tools that the character has? I can easily say that my character loses all MU in order to downplay but how can you deny your character being good if he has plenty of good tools?
I have been thinking about this for a while because it doesn't make sense to me. The general notion is that tier placement should be based on number of winning match ups vs losing match ups yet match up numbers are very subjective. What a person believes is a 6-4 winning match up for a character, another person believes is a 4-6 losing match up.
Recently there was a discussion on the Kitana vs Tanya (Pyromancer) MU some believed it was in Kitana's favor while other believe it was in Tanya's favor, in the end Tanya ended up mopping the Kitana's and this didn't change anything on their opinion they still believed the MU was in Kitana's favor or even and that the Tanya player was better. So the match numbers in the end didn't prove anything and the opinion was based mostly on the idea that Kitana does have the proper tools to even up the match up if used correctly.
Now people say that tools isn't the way of determining the tier placement of a character. But why is this?
Its easier to agree on what are good tools and bad tools. Proof of this is that people who play the same characters usually use the same strings, staggers, specials while avoid using the bad tools. So a tool being good or bad is not as subjective as MU numbers.
Also, tools are actually what determine if a MU is good or bad. For example a character without any tools to get in or out of Subzero's clone set ups is considered a losing matchup against subzero.
Its not possible for a character to have great tools and be garbage, and it's also very likely that a character with very few decent tools is bad character.
So why is tier placement based on MU instead of the set of tools that the character has? I can easily say that my character loses all MU in order to downplay but how can you deny your character being good if he has plenty of good tools?