Brawl Tiers?

Ofc you can play better with Mario if you're a casual gamer, but if you're playing competitive, where everyone has the mad skillz, then odds are the player playing with the character higher on the tier list will win.

Um...not really. They just describe the most likely outcome. I have seen competitive Pichu players beat competitive Falco players on youtube, for example. Tier lists do have an effect on the outcome of the match, but unless the players are equally as good with their characters then the better player should win.

You need to read things more clearly.

Mario is a great character. He is good for beginners and when you come back to him after you've mastered the game, hes pretty cool.

Pikachu is WAY overused online.

Underrated characters are: Olimar, Captain Falcon and Mario. No one EVER uses them!

The champ uses Shiek I think.

:/

Tiers predict which characters will win when both players have the same amount of skill with that character. Take an awesome Yoshi player and an awesome Snake player playing on a neutral stage. The Snake player will most likely win because Snake has more advantages than Yoshi.

In competitive battling, you want every advantage possible. This means you train with the character that best suits you and is high on the tier list. Can you win with low-tier characters? Yes; Gimpyfish and various Mewtwo players prove this. However, they are limited in their potential compared to higher tier characters.

In a casual environment (aka, your house with a bunch of friends), tiers are not relevant at all. You don't play on a neutral stage with no items and the players are most likely not at the same skill level, so it comes down to luck and who has the highest skill level.

If you want to play a certain way, do it. The game is customizable; if you want to play on Final Destination with no items and just Meta Knight, have fun! If you want to play with just Pikachu and only Bob-ombs, go ahead. Don't chide the other side for playing the way that they consider to be fun. Yes, competitive players do have fun wavedashing and doing all that stuff they do. I've never seen a competitive player look down on someone for playing 'casually'; the opposite happens all the time.

Tiers most certainly exist. Let's take an imaginary character called Ball. Ball is gigantic, starts the match with 999% damage, and can't do anything. It has no attacks and can't move. Are you going to argue that this character has as much potential as one such as Fox?

Threads like this end up infuriating me because it's always one side chiding the other. It's a video game; why don't you let people take it as seriously (or not seriously_ as they want to?

How is ROB a top tier?, anyway was everyone knows: TIERS ARE FOR QUEERS!!

... said:

I've never seen a competitive player look down on someone for playing 'casually'; the opposite happens all the time.

Click to expand...

I've seen many tourneyfags flaunt their knowledge of tiers and/or mock any player that plays smash on levels that aren't final destination. Your victim card is invalidated.

Now, I have no problem with competitive gaming in and of itself. However, I almost take offense at the lengths people will go to bend and fold a game to their competitive needs. The most fitting example for the forum would be all of the tools that play pokemon competitively. My argument is that if you go through such great lengths to alter the gameplay to make it more fitting for competition, you're no longer playing the same game. This can be applied to smash tournaments, with the ever popular "no items, fox only, final destination" and Team Fortress 2 clan leagues, which remove random criticals from the game and generally play 8v8. (The game was designed for 12v12) You can win all the tournaments around, but never say you're good at that game, because you aren't really playing it.

ROB is a high tier character because his weight makes him hard to knock-out, his great recoveries only help this fact, and he is suprisingly strong.

Now, I have no problem with competitive gaming in and of itself. However, I almost take offense at the lengths people will go to bend and fold a game to their competitive needs. My argument is that if you go through such great lengths to alter the gameplay to make it more fitting for competition, you're no longer playing the same game. This can be applied to smash tournaments, with the ever popular "no items, fox only, final destination."

Click to expand...

How are they altering the game, exactly? The game WAS MADE to be customizable. If you want no items, then turn them off. If you want to play as Fox over Kirby, go ahead. If you only want to play on Final Destination, then just pick the stage. The fact is, they are doing NOTHING to change what the game is at its core. They are only changing the RULES to make it fitting for their competitive environment. Also, characters are not banned, except for the case of Meta Knight in Italy, meaning you can play as any character you want. If you hate Fox, then there is what, 23-24 other options? And that is just in Melee.

I play the game casually, but I hate it when people attack the tiers or competitive rulesets simpily because they don't like them.

I've seen many tourneyfags flaunt their knowledge of tiers and/or mock any player that plays smash on levels that aren't final destination. Your victim card is invalidated.

Click to expand...

Are you referring to the five or six snobs on Smashboards that haunt the site? I guess there always are a few assholes who are ready to pounce on random people. However, on the whole I have found way more people who are willing to criticize competitive smash bros players than criticize 'casual' player.

ETA: Forget this paragraph that used to be here.

The reason for the rules in competitive smash is to find out who really has the best technique. They try to play in the most vacuum-like environment possible. Stages like Infinite Glacier offer advantages to some characters and disadvantages to others. Items such as exploding crates are random and can ruin someone's chances of winning due to something that nobody had control over. It really sucks when both you and your opponent have one life left, you're about to make the finishing blow, and an exploding crate rolls into you and your opponent wins out of luck (this has happened to me. I love items but argh I hate it when that happens D<). Basically, they don't want stuff like this to happen, especially in tournaments where people play for money.

Is it perfect? No. Final Destination benefits characters with long range attacks such as Fox. Some characters aren't as good as they could be without items (Pichu). However, it has been decided that this is the best way to make a vacuum.

I'd also like to point out that most, if not all, competitive players could probably kick anyone's butt on any stage with all items on barring the possibility that an exploding crate falling on them.