I'm sorry if I'm being a jerk, but am I the only one who doesn't really like tiers? I mean, nowadays, you hear about people playing the Pokemon and SSB games only using top tier characters only because they are top tier. What ever happened to playing as your favorite characters or battling with your favorite Pokemon? Besides, it's not the character that wins matches, or the Pokemon that wins battles, it's the skill of the players. Overall, TR4Q.
Kaz
#2
Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:03 pm
Administrator
TR4Q, it all about the person playing, not the character
Logan
#3
Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:15 pm
Olimar
Exactly. My favorite characters to play from Melee (I still haven't gotten Brawl) are mostly from the lower tiers, like Link, Zelda, Mr. Game & Watch, Yoshi, Bowser, etc, and I hate playing as Jigglypuff, which is somehow in the top tier for the Melee tiers.Mr. GayManWatch wrote:TR4Q, it all about the person playing, not the character
TheBlueYoshi
#4
Pokemon tiers are necessary compared to Brawl. In brawl there is only limited characters, meaning very low compared to Pokemon's new 650 idk something like that. If Pokemon were to have no tiers, then there would be no strategic gameplay and arceus's running amuck using Judgement and Darkrai's using Dark Void then a move that'll knock the shit out of you.
Overall, Brawl tiers are useless, Pokemon needs one.
Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:09 am
Bulbear
HardcoreGamer4Ever wrote:I'm sorry if I'm being a jerk, but am I the only one who doesn't really like tiers? I mean, nowadays, you hear about people playing the Pokemon and SSB games only using top tier characters only because they are top tier. What ever happened to playing as your favorite characters or battling with your favorite Pokemon? Besides, it's not the character that wins matches, or the Pokemon that wins battles, it's the skill of the players. Overall, TR4Q.
Pokemon tiers are necessary compared to Brawl. In brawl there is only limited characters, meaning very low compared to Pokemon's new 650 idk something like that. If Pokemon were to have no tiers, then there would be no strategic gameplay and arceus's running amuck using Judgement and Darkrai's using Dark Void then a move that'll knock the shit out of you.
Overall, Brawl tiers are useless, Pokemon needs one.
Skochko
#5
Sun Dec 19, 2010 4:32 am
Administrator
Well I did say I won't post anymore, but I feel like I can continue from TBY's post. Pokemon tiers are necessary for competitive playing. GameFreak created 493 Pokemon which are not similar (I am not taking the new Pokemon in account, since they are not in the tiers). In order to use your favourite Pokemon, you have to give it a fair matchup. Obviously Arbok versus Ho-Oh is not fair...
HOWEVER, the tiers are not everything. Look at Parasect. It is doing very fine in both NeverUsed and Uber tiers, but in UnderUsed and OverUsed, it is just doomed... Unique Pokemon can find their spot in all tiers, with proper team synergy... Someone like me is going to use lower-tier Pokemon in OU, to break the faggotry... But without tiers, the competitive game would be rather messy... Just like the current Generation 5 metagame is...
As for Brawl, I do not see any purpose in them... I am still going to use the characters I like, no matter what their tier is... Obviously my opinion about Brawl is not essential, but yea, I am using characters from different tiers (Zelda to Olimar)...
HOWEVER, the tiers are not everything. Look at Parasect. It is doing very fine in both NeverUsed and Uber tiers, but in UnderUsed and OverUsed, it is just doomed... Unique Pokemon can find their spot in all tiers, with proper team synergy... Someone like me is going to use lower-tier Pokemon in OU, to break the faggotry... But without tiers, the competitive game would be rather messy... Just like the current Generation 5 metagame is...
As for Brawl, I do not see any purpose in them... I am still going to use the characters I like, no matter what their tier is... Obviously my opinion about Brawl is not essential, but yea, I am using characters from different tiers (Zelda to Olimar)...
Kuro
#8
Sun Dec 19, 2010 7:04 am
Kid Roy
Pokemon tiers are definitely needed. Without them the metagame would be centralized around Ubers and all other Pokemon would see no usage.
Brawl tiers are needed for low tier tournaments, mid tier tournaments, etc. Metaknight is clearly better than every other character and Ganondorf is the worst, but other than those it's about who's playing the character. A Ganondorf will never beat an equally skilled Metaknight. Whereas a Zero Suit Samus, Ice Climbers, or even Yoshi that's as skilled as the MK may go even. Ganon isn't competitively viable outside of low tier tournaments. Even then he does pretty bad.
Both of them have the same issue. While brawl tiers are debatable, Pokemon tiers are definitely needed.
If you're playing Pokemon or brawl for fun and you don't bother learning AT's or EV training, etc tiers don't really matter so much. You can just use your favorite Pokemon. If you're going to play either strategically, tiers are needed.
Brawl tiers are needed for low tier tournaments, mid tier tournaments, etc. Metaknight is clearly better than every other character and Ganondorf is the worst, but other than those it's about who's playing the character. A Ganondorf will never beat an equally skilled Metaknight. Whereas a Zero Suit Samus, Ice Climbers, or even Yoshi that's as skilled as the MK may go even. Ganon isn't competitively viable outside of low tier tournaments. Even then he does pretty bad.
Both of them have the same issue. While brawl tiers are debatable, Pokemon tiers are definitely needed.
If you're playing Pokemon or brawl for fun and you don't bother learning AT's or EV training, etc tiers don't really matter so much. You can just use your favorite Pokemon. If you're going to play either strategically, tiers are needed.
CartoonLink
#10
Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:18 am
Zekrom & Reshiram
I find them very pointless. I've seen people arguing over who should have won a match in Brawl, but the person who won only won because he was using a top tier character. I don't think tiers mean anything, it depends on if you are good with the character.
Kuro
#11
You can say that, but characters are just better than others. It's partially true, most of the characters in top tier are there because they have better match-ups than some of the high-mid tiers but it's pretty even from mid to top tier as far as how good the character is, with the exception of MetaKnight who is the best character in the game. It's not unlikely to see a Peach going even with a Diddy Kong or a Zero Suit Samus going even with a MetaKnight.
Low tier is the problem. An Ike or Ganondorf isn't going to be going even with or beating a MetaKnight of equal skill level. The Ganondorf will have to be substantially better, even then it could go either way.
It's all about Matchups, not tiers, but they're still needed.
Sun Dec 19, 2010 9:48 am
Kid Roy
Cocotroid wrote:I find them very pointless. I've seen people arguing over who should have won a match in Brawl, but the person who won only won because he was using a top tier character. I don't think tiers mean anything, it depends on if you are good with the character.
You can say that, but characters are just better than others. It's partially true, most of the characters in top tier are there because they have better match-ups than some of the high-mid tiers but it's pretty even from mid to top tier as far as how good the character is, with the exception of MetaKnight who is the best character in the game. It's not unlikely to see a Peach going even with a Diddy Kong or a Zero Suit Samus going even with a MetaKnight.
Low tier is the problem. An Ike or Ganondorf isn't going to be going even with or beating a MetaKnight of equal skill level. The Ganondorf will have to be substantially better, even then it could go either way.
It's all about Matchups, not tiers, but they're still needed.
Kuro
#13
Sun Dec 19, 2010 12:42 pm
Kid Roy
1st video: MK is horrible. Izaw is too good.
2nd video: Bad players are bad.
As I said, there has to be a skill gap between players, like there was in the first match.
2nd video: Bad players are bad.
As I said, there has to be a skill gap between players, like there was in the first match.
Kaz
#14
See, it about the players
Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:32 am
Administrator
Kuro wrote:1st video: MK is horrible. Izaw is too good.
2nd video: Bad players are bad.
See, it about the players
5gSkyYoshi
#15
Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:54 am
Administrator
^ This. I know it's true b/c of personal experience.Kuro wrote:Cocotroid wrote:I find them very pointless. I've seen people arguing over who should have won a match in Brawl, but the person who won only won because he was using a top tier character. I don't think tiers mean anything, it depends on if you are good with the character.
You can say that, but characters are just better than others. It's partially true, most of the characters in top tier are there because they have better match-ups than some of the high-mid tiers but it's pretty even from mid to top tier as far as how good the character is, with the exception of MetaKnight who is the best character in the game. It's not unlikely to see a Peach going even with a Diddy Kong or a Zero Suit Samus going even with a MetaKnight.
Low tier is the problem. An Ike or Ganondorf isn't going to be going even with or beating a MetaKnight of equal skill level. The Ganondorf will have to be substantially better, even then it could go either way.
It's all about Matchups, not tiers, but they're still needed.
The Nintendo Domain » Global Gaming » General Gaming Discussion » Who thinks Pokemon and SSB tiers are pointless?
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|