GG:AC Official Tier List Thread

[deci]

http://www.dustloop.com/forums/showpost.php?p=225229&postcount=715

yep that's pretty much what i was getting at.

thanks.

[frtpunchsamurai]

don't compare chipp to may & millia please.

i feel sorry for chipp players though ..

i heard that Susumu left you all

[frtpunchsamurai]

do you have anything to actually back this comment?

i'm saying slayer is top of A tier, but just not as good as eddie and testament which takes him out of s tier. he's easy mode to win with against a lot of people because in the us, most people have horrible defense and cannot even block 6k or realize that he is probably the easiest character in the game to ib.

Please don't repeat what you've already said. I know how bad it is when Slayer can't get in just as bad as knowing everything about slayer

IB'ing 6K? Come on its not that you're going to lose without 6K? And besides you can use a feint 6k to mess with their timing

[Teyah]

shouldn't it actually be the character's practical potential that counts?

Yes, and this is how basically how every tierlist in existence has been made. There is no point in ranking characters based on obscure, impractical possibilities that do not turn up in match play, so of course we rank according to overall/realistic (but still quite optimistic) levels of play. This is nothing new.

[Hellmonkey]

Optimistic? Realistic? How much so? Get as optimistic as possible and you have people playing "bottom tier" (re: ruu, raimuki, koichi) who show that the characters definitely have the potential to dominate as hard as any "top tier" at a realistic level.

[axel]

A perfect GG bot will just slashback everything and break every throw, so 2 perfect GG bots playing will end up in a time over draw.

[Teyah]

Realistic to the average level currently being played, and optimistic in the sense that players have enough technical expertise to not drop their combos or perform suboptimal oki / pressure patterns. Of course there are exceptional players, but those players would likely make any character of their choosing (with equal amounts of dedication) appear better than their tier reflects, even if their character is already high-tier. See: #R Koichi (MI), #R or AC Ogawa (ED)

[Hellmonkey]

Average? How are you supposed to define that? So you're saying it doesn't matter who good players use because they could dominate with any character in the game? Meaning that every character is as good as any other character at top level play, because it doesn't matter who the character is with the top Japanese players? Your examples of #R Koichi or Ogawa (and especially AC Ogawa, who has been losing tons since last SBO) only help re-enforce this, don't they? Surely #R Ogawa was a great example of why Eddie really was S tier in the game, he would win most of his games even against the strongest players of other characters. Same with #R Koichi. However, we don't see that at all in AC. Hell, the only "S-tier" in the top 4 teams of SBO this year, En, who is easily one of the best players in Japan, was brought there by Anji... Instead of making already high-tier characters appear better than their tier reflects, aren't we just seeing "low tier" and "mid tier" looking as strong as "high tier"? edit:spelling!

[Teyah]

So you're saying it doesn't matter who good players use because they could dominate with any character in the game? Meaning that every character is as good as any other character at top level play, because it doesn't matter who the character is with the top Japanese players?

No, I'm not saying this at all. (Please re-read what I wrote above)

The second part of your statement here is quite a logical leap from the first. It also cannot be true, due to differing move properties inherent to each character (ie. tiers); playing a low-tier character at top-level play does not give you the benefit of 'higher potential' than a higher-tier character (if anything, it's the reverse).

Your examples of #R Koichi or Ogawa (and especially AC Ogawa, who has been losing tons since last SBO) only help re-inforce this, don't they? Surely #R Ogawa was a great example of why Eddie really was S tier in the game, he would win most of his games even against the strongest players of other characters. Same with #R Koichi.

Yes, just as #R Koichi and #R/AC Ogawa were able to take their various 6-4 matchups and in reality turn them to something closer to 8-2, Ruu seems to be doing a similar thing with his character in AC.

Also: AC Ogawa "losing tons"? Do you mean to say he's losing more than 40-45% of his matches (what his win ratio should be, according to his character tier) at high-level play? Various sources prove otherwise, I believe you're only focusing on a few key losses here.

However, we don't see that at all in AC. Hell, the only "S-tier" in the top 4 teams of SBO this year, En, who is easily one of the best players in Japan, was brought there by Anji...

Instead of making already high-tier characters appear better than their tier reflects, aren't we just seeing "low tier" and "mid tier" looking as strong as "high tier"?

For the same reasons mentioned above, this is seen across all tier levels, not just the lower tiers of AC. Players like Shounen, Woshige, Ogawa, Ruu, etc all win a great deal more often than they 'should'.

Also, it seems like you're valuing a select few tournament results very heavily in your conclusions, when these results can be explained away by probability. It is entirely within the laws of probability that a team consisting of all 4-6 matchups could make it to the finals of SBO (and win), but this doesn't change the fact that overall they will have a much tougher time on average than a team consisting of characters with mostly 6-4 matchups.

[Hellmonkey]

Yes, just as #R Koichi and #R/AC Ogawa were able to take their various 6-4 matchups and in reality turn them to something closer to 8-2, Ruu seems to be doing a similar thing with his character in AC.

I guess the entire point went over your head. "High tier" in AC is not dominating the top players of lower tiers like they did in Reload, which had shown that they truly are stronger characters. Ruu and other "low tier" character players showing their characters can defeat even the best players higher tiers shows balance in AC. There is no "high tier" dominance like there used to be because the the game is balanced at top level play. These SBO results show that quite blatantly.

Also: AC Ogawa "losing tons"? Do you mean to say he's losing more than 40-45% of his matches (what his win ratio should be, according to his character tier) at high-level play? Various sources prove otherwise, I believe you're only focusing on a few key losses here.

Losing in the 23v23, G3 5v5, a-cho 3v3, SBO prelim that almost caused him not to qualifiy and then not making top 4 after he managed to.. how is he not losing tons?

For the same reasons mentioned above, this is seen across all tier levels, not just the lower tiers of AC. Players like Shounen, Woshige, Ogawa, Ruu, etc all win a great deal more often than they 'should'.

Except that all "high tier" characters don't win a great deal more often than they 'should' against good players of "low tier" characters......

Also, it seems like you're valuing a select few tournament results very heavily in your conclusions, when these results can be explained away by probability. It is entirely within the laws of probability that a team consisting of all 4-6 matchups could make it to the finals of SBO (and win), but this doesn't change the fact that overall they will have a much tougher time on average than a team consisting of characters with mostly 6-4 matchups.

How many tournaments with low tier characters doing extremely well is it going to take?

edit: spelling

[Hintalove]

I would just like to throw it out there that En got his team into SBO, not that that has any relevance to the actual discussion going on here. Why don't you guys just agree to disagree. I propose we shift gears and start tiering players, because it's obvious that player tier matters significantly more than character tier, or should I say that the higher level play gets the more marginalized advantages become. I think every one should just play pot so threads like these don't have to happen.

[deci]

Please don't repeat what you've already said. I know how bad it is when Slayer can't get in just as bad as knowing everything about slayer

IB'ing 6K? Come on its not that you're going to lose without 6K? And besides you can use a feint 6k to mess with their timing

i repeated what i said because you seemed to misunderstand me the first time.

if you know how bad it is when slayer can't get in, then what are you disagreeing with me about?

ib'ing 6k? lol when did i say anything about ib'ing 6k?

first off, if you're blocking 6k at all, you should be blocking that shit on reaction which if you're doing it right gives you a free ib anyway.

2nd, it's somewhat pointless to try to ib 6k since it will still be slight frame advantage even if you ib it.

i said "block" 6k as in most american players that bitch about slayer being broken cannot even block 6k on reaction.

i also never said 6k was even important to his game. 6k / 2k is like slayer's weakest mix up.

a lot of characters can just counter hit that shit out of the air on reaction whether you feint or not. 6k is pretty much only safe as mix up when it's meaty (also like the only time 6k feint is really effective) but there's much better mix up he could be doing for oki (unless it's after a throw)

when i'm talking about ib'ing, i'm talking about ib'ing moves that actually take away the frame advantage of the move and leave slayer at disadvantage in order to break his pressure. or all the moves that are generally safe, but when ib'd leave slayer vulnerable.

ie: all the shit potemkin can ib that leads to free pot buster.

but as someone who "knows everything about slayer" you probably already knows this.

which leads me back to my original point: what exactly is your disagreement with me and why are you arguing with me again?

[scrub]

just a thought... maybe tiers apply better to people whose names you can't immediately identify, like the ~80% of the "unknown" people participating in ranbats. y'know, still at that high-level-competition area without taking the absolute best and using that to represent the larger majority. obviously, players good enough to break the mold and gain recognition are adding a great deal on top of their characters' base strengths

[frtpunchsamurai]

I propose we shift gears and start tiering players, because it's obvious that player tier matters significantly more than character tier, or should I say that the higher level play gets the more marginalized advantages become.

Indeed.

Watch how blacksnake owned hellmonkey despite the fact that baiken and especially eddie dominates Venom :D (hellmonkey doesn't have enough VE matchup though)

@Deci

sorry i don't know why i am disagreeing with you although i really agree to what you said..

[Digital Watches]

Wait, there are vids up from Evo? Where?

[Teyah]

I guess the entire point went over your head.

Thanks, but no. Your whole idea of "players of low-tiers have massive growth potential while players of high-tiers sit and rot at the top!" is fundamentally flawed.

"High tier" in AC is not dominating the top players of lower tiers like they did in Reload, which had shown that they truly are stronger characters. Ruu and other "low tier" character players showing their characters can defeat even the best players higher tiers shows balance in AC. There is no "high tier" dominance like there used to be because the the game is balanced at top level play. These SBO results show that quite blatantly.

All this shows is that AC high-tiers are less difficult to defeat than those in #R, a fact that most people would agree on.

As for SBO, it's not surprising that a team reliant on S-tiers didn't come out on top, considering the total number of entrants of high-tiers compared to non high-tiers (hint: there are a lot more of the latter).

Losing in the 23v23, G3 5v5, a-cho 3v3, SBO prelim that almost caused him not to qualifiy and then not making top 4 after he managed to.. how is he not losing tons?

As a player that should be winning roughly 60% of his matches, all that Ogawa has to do is advance beyond the first round 60% of the time in tourneys he enters to be playing as should be expected from his character. His team going 2-1 at SBO exceeds these expectations. But if "losing tons" refers to not winning 80+% of his matches like he used to then gee, I guess you may be right!

Except that all "high tier" characters don't win a great deal more often than they 'should' against good players of "low tier" characters......

It seems you missed the point entirely, please refer to my previous post on how top players win more often than average players, regardless of characters, regardless of tiers. When you have two good players, one of which uses a high-tier and one of which uses a low-tier, it's not uncommon to see things like the Shounen vs Ruu or Ogawa vs Kaqn massacres that go well beyond the bounds of the tiers or matchup lists.

How many tournaments with low tier characters doing extremely well is it going to take?

More than one or two?

You're jumping to the conclusion that tiers must not matter, because S-tiers aren't dominating as they used to in some tournaments this year. While in actuality, this is to be expected at some point, as non high-tiers in AC aren't handicapped to the point of having no chance to win, and are also played in much greater numbers than the top 5. I take it you've never taken a statistics class?

[reaVer]

23v23 was last year, which was after Ogawa won SBO. Ogawa got beat by KZO which is the same fate Isa suffered with Sol right before(yes, KZO took out two really good players asif they were trash) and afterwards tripped over Potemkin. The 23v23s after Isa took Ogawa's spot and the last one Isa lost in a similar fashion as Ogawa did, except this time it was Ruu if I'm not mistaken.

[Spirit Juice]

If you guys keep posting one liners and making comments off topic, they're going to get deleted and get the thread locked once again.

[Hellmonkey]

It's absolutely pointless arguing with you but why do you go so far as to make things up?

Thanks, but no. Your whole idea of "players of low-tiers have massive growth potential while players of high-tiers sit and rot at the top!" is fundamentally flawed.

What? Like I said...

All this shows is that AC high-tiers are less difficult to defeat than those in #R, a fact that most people would agree on.

As for SBO, it's not surprising that a team reliant on S-tiers didn't come out on top, considering the total number of entrants of high-tiers compared to non high-tiers (hint: there are a lot more of the latter).

You're jumping to the conclusion that tiers must not matter, because S-tiers aren't dominating as they used to in some tournaments this year. While in actuality, this is to be expected at some point, as non high-tiers in AC aren't handicapped to the point of having no chance to win, and are also played in much greater numbers than the top 5. I take it you've never taken a statistics class?

~56% of the players is "a lot more"? You could have fooled me. Why mention statistics if you haven't looked at the numbers?

As a player that should be winning roughly 60% of his matches, all that Ogawa has to do is advance beyond the first round 60% of the time in tourneys he enters to be playing as should be expected from his character. His team going 2-1 at SBO exceeds these expectations. But if "losing tons" refers to not winning 80+% of his matches like he used to then gee, I guess you may be right!

Would you please try to have a slight bit of consistency in your argument? First you mention #R Ogawa and Koichi, who showed that top characters in Reload truly did rape even the top players of other characters. I point out that we don't see that at all anymore in AC, and you say OH BUT THAT'S EXPECTED! ??????? He's losing tons because even as one of the "S-tier" characters he hasn't got far in ANYTHING since last SBO, a player of his caliber in a game where those tiers really played a role at top level play would win much more, like we saw in #R.

It seems you missed the point entirely, please refer to my previous post on how top players win more often than average players, regardless of characters, regardless of tiers. When you have two good players, one of which uses a high-tier and one of which uses a low-tier, it's not uncommon to see things like the Shounen vs Ruu or Ogawa vs Kaqn massacres that go well beyond the bounds of the tiers or matchup lists.

You're right, the tiers or matchup lists don't apply to top level play in AC, which is the level of play tier lists are generally created to describe, at the realistic but ideal level of play to show the potential of the characters themselves. (Except for your supposed "Average level" tier list? Still waiting on how we are supposed to define that.)

More than one or two?

I see you don't follow Japanese GG very much.

[reaVer]

Errr, Ogawa vs kaqn isn't a good tier massacre example. Ogawa was(and perhaps still is) simply a full level above kaqn.

[Teyah]

It's absolutely pointless arguing with you but why do you go so far as to make things up?What? Like I said...

I'm not quite sure whether you are conveniently ignoring my relevant posts (to salvage your ego? I don't see any other reason), or if you're just not able to understand the connection between your argument and what I have posted, three times - no less. Nevertheless, here is what you are asserting:

[...] every character is as good as any other character at top level play, because it doesn't matter who the character is with the top Japanese players

Instead of making already high-tier characters appear better than their tier reflects, aren't we just seeing "low tier" and "mid tier" looking as strong as "high tier"?

Now, again, for the fourth, and hopefully final time:

You are saying that through enough dedication, a top player can take a low-tier character and raise them to the same level as other high-tier characters that are played by other top players. The glaring flaw here is that this does not account for similar efforts by said other top players, who are using fundamentally better (higher-tier) characters, who have less risky/more rewarding options available. Moreover, due to the better options and tools for higher-tier characters, similarly high amounts of effort should theoretically result in higher adeptness for these characters than for characters with fewer tools/options (low-tiers).

It's not like the low-tiers have more naturally safe or more naturally effective options that can be unlocked by X amount of practice - if this were true, they wouldn't be low-tier in the first place. Sure, top players of low-tiers like Ruu can practice and refine their game to make it as safe and effective as possible, but so can top players of high-tiers, and since high-tiers are fundamentally better characters, they will never be on even ground.

If this does not help you understand, then I refer you back to my previous posts on this topic, which I sincerely hope you will read:

http://www.dustloop.com/forums/showpost.php?p=293673&postcount=1091 (para 2)

http://www.dustloop.com/forums/showpost.php?p=293695&postcount=1093 (paras 1, 4)

http://www.dustloop.com/forums/showpost.php?p=293811&postcount=1100 (para 1; crude, but perhaps easier to understand)

~56% of the players is "a lot more"? You could have fooled me. Why mention statistics if you haven't looked at the numbers?

According to AtG's brackets, there were 58 non-high tiers used (B/C/D tiers), compared to 38 high tiers (S/A). There being over 1.5 times as many non-high tiers as high-tiers, certainly qualifies as "a lot more".

I have no idea where your numbers are from.

Would you please try to have a slight bit of consistency in your argument? First you mention #R Ogawa and Koichi, who showed that top characters in Reload truly did rape even the top players of other characters. I point out that we don't see that at all anymore in AC, and you say OH BUT THAT'S EXPECTED! ??????? He's losing tons because even as one of the "S-tier" characters he hasn't got far in ANYTHING since last SBO, a player of his caliber in a game where those tiers really played a role at top level play would win much more, like we saw in #R.

This to me, points out that you did not even bother to read/comprehend my argument in the first place, which is a recurring theme among your posts... why should I bother replying to you, Hellmonkey, if you don't even bother reading the responses?

I note that it is expected, because I've been agreeing all along that AC is more balanced than #R, to the point where all characters can realistically compete. Where we differ is that you say that tiers have no bearing on character balance at the top, whereas I quite obviously disagree. You would realize this if you took the time to comprehend my previous posts.

You're right, the tiers or matchup lists don't apply to top level play in AC, which is the level of play tier lists are generally created to describe, at the realistic but ideal level of play to show the potential of the characters themselves. (Except for your supposed "Average level" tier list? Still waiting on how we are supposed to define that.)

Thanks for taking my quote out of context. If you look to the following sentence in that excerpt, you'll see the justification.

"Realistic to the average level currently being played" was referring to practical techniques and combos (as that is what was being discussed between myself and deci). I can see how you could get this mixed up with level of competition, which you seemed intent on discussing, so I won't hold this one against you. But on the whole, do please try to read more carefully so I don't have to repeat myself multiple times in the future.

A closing note:

If it's going to take you another 3 days to come up with a post similar to your last effort: Don't bother. Quite frankly, I find it childish that you've been repeatedly dodging my main point of contention and instead focused on trying to nitpick minor details wherever possible. If this trend doesn't improve, then I don't think there is anything more worth to discuss with you.

[Hellmonkey]

I glanced over your post earlier today and felt I had to say something, lol.

There were 43.5% A and S tier out of all of the quals, and 44% A and S tier in the finals. (Testament, Eddie, Slayer, Potemkin, Jam, Baiken) vs the rest of the cast, I got the numbers from the SBO thread's lists.

You are saying that through enough dedication, a top player can take a low-tier character and raise them to the same level as other high-tier characters that are played by other top players.

Sure, top players of low-tiers like Ruu can practice and refine their game to make it as safe and effective as possible, but so can top players of high-tiers, and since high-tiers are fundamentally better characters, they will never be on even ground.

NO THAT IS NOT WHAT I AM SAYING. How can your reading comprehension be this poor.

My point is that they aren't fundamentally better. Tiers don't matter at top level play in this game. I'm not dodging anything, is it really that hard to understand. I've given the reasons of why I think this way. The examples of top players of "low-tier" characters being on the same level as top players of "high-tier" characters is to show that neither character is stronger than the other. It has nothing to do with the "lower-tier" raising themselves up to the "higher-tier's" level. Their potentials (which the tier list should reflect) are the same, it's in the hands of the player.

"Realistic to the average level currently being played" was referring to practical techniques and combos (as that is what was being discussed between myself and deci). I can see how you could get this mixed up with level of competition, which you seemed intent on discussing, so I won't hold this one against you. But on the whole, do please try to read more carefully so I don't have to repeat myself multiple times in the future.

..................................................

Optimistic? Realistic? How much so?

Realistic to the average level currently being played

Average? How are you supposed to define that?

You're defining average level of play by people knowing "practical techniques and combos"? That's a bit vague, don't you think?

This to me, points out that you did not even bother to read/comprehend my argument in the first place, which is a recurring theme among your posts... why should I bother replying to you, Hellmonkey, if you don't even bother reading the responses?

From the person who completely missed the entire point I was arguing.

[Urzakor]

wait, I've been trying to follow along but I give up. Are you guys trying to argue that tiers exist? or that tiers don't matter? cuz they both can be true but don't exactly mean the same thing. Hi dustloop.

[AtTheGates]

well, it's a fact that tiers become less important at the top, but they still do matter. i like to point to ogawa's matchup list for eddie again, which shows that in his opinion, eddie's best matchup is a 6.5 to 3.5 ed vs. pot. most of the other matchups are 6:4. If anyone has a viewpoint from the top, it would be him, and as we can see, he thinks eddie has a clear advantage, although a relatively small one(!).

[Hellmonkey]

wait, I've been trying to follow along but I give up.

Are you guys trying to argue that tiers exist? or that tiers don't matter? cuz they both can be true but don't exactly mean the same thing.

Hi dustloop.

Of course they exist, but there is no good way to define them, and at the top level of play they are so close it doesn't matter.