[Xrd] Tier Discussion

[Soviet Bear]

Really, learning anyone outside Top 5 + Sol might as well be a waste in some ways. Me saying that is more of "winning tournaments is the absolute most important thing to me" situation. Venom CAN win tournaments, of course he can. Then again, it's going to be hard tin win no matter who you are when you're starting out, especially in highly competitive areas like the northeast, midwest, Houston, etc.

 

Last year's BB tourney on EVO left the impression that if you pick a high tier character, you should expect that everyone has been learning to play said top tier character (everyone was ready for Koko). If you were playing low tier, you might have had the element of surprise, but your character was still "weaker". I feel like it cancels each other out and the better player wins in the end.

[StylisH]

Last year's BB tourney on EVO left the impression that if you pick a high tier character, you should expect that everyone has been learning to play said top tier character (everyone was ready for Koko). If you were playing low tier, you might have had the element of surprise, but your character was still "weaker". I feel like it cancels each other out and the better player wins in the end.

 

I just wish that everyone picked characters they actually like, as opposed to "hey, this one's top tier, I'll go with that"

[Angry Guy of DE]

Some people like characters that they can actually win with :/

Bedman's main issues is his movement is a little clunky with a faster than normal walk but a poor dash when used to advance.  Once he gets his rewind moves started he can do pressure but most of them on block are iffy or able to be blitz shielded or IB'd to make you unable to pressure without meter.

Bedman also seems to have rather poor guts and stun(?), his better than average defense unfortunately evens out with most of the cast with higher guts once they get below 50% health.

Also being heavy weight is generally bad since they are easier to combo, especially for Slayer since he can confirm into j.2K loops and end with j.PD to get a knockdown.

[StylisH]

At least some people still play him though

[Angry Guy of DE]

I think its rare for any game that has a semblance of balance to have literally nobody play a character.

A good Bedman that knows match-ups can definitely put in work, meanwhile 90% of people probably have no real high level Bedman play.

Now let's wait for a leak that shows Bedman's sister CouchGirl to be playable.

[StylisH]

I think its rare for any game that has a semblance of balance to have literally nobody play a character.

A good Bedman that knows match-ups can definitely put in work, meanwhile 90% of people probably have no real high level Bedman play.

Now let's wait for a leak that shows Bedman's sister CouchGirl to be playable.

 

That's the beauty of playing an unpopular character though.  CouchGirl?!  I'd buy that for a dollar.

[DaiAndOh]

I just wish that everyone picked characters they actually like, as opposed to "hey, this one's top tier, I'll go with that"

 

Usually, top tier characters have a lot of unique or interesting options that make them appealing from a gameplay sense, just as many other characters do, if not more.

[Coffeeling]

I just wish that everyone picked characters they actually like, as opposed to "hey, this one's top tier, I'll go with that"

 

You know, there's this thing called preference. Where to someone the character being big and burly or having some other aesthetic is really important. For me, those important things are power, mobility and tools. => I end up playing top tier just about always.

[heavymetalmixer]

Usually, top tier characters have a lot of unique or interesting options that make them appealing from a gameplay sense, just as many other characters do, if not more.

 

But using not-so-used characters makes the players want to discover as much tech as they can, because others didn't or don't want to.

[NecroTheReaper]

Some people like characters that they can actually win with :/

Bedman's main issues is his movement is a little clunky with a faster than normal walk but a poor dash when used to advance. Once he gets his rewind moves started he can do pressure but most of them on block are iffy or able to be blitz shielded or IB'd to make you unable to pressure without meter.

Bedman also seems to have rather poor guts and stun(?), his better than average defense unfortunately evens out with most of the cast with higher guts once they get below 50% health.

Also being heavy weight is generally bad since they are easier to combo, especially for Slayer since he can confirm into j.2K loops and end with j.PD to get a knockdown.

He screws up combos just as much as he lets some be easier. His size and weight I don't find to really be an issue. My personal issues are that you cant YRC to set up task seals, task seals being able to be destroyed, his projectile not staying out on block, very few combo paths (including not being able to combo into sweep from f.S or 2S), and of course all of his moves being neutral or worse on block.

Biggest issues though are the ones with the seals. They're all kinda bad or worse on block, but in order to play neutral you need em out. If you get one out, anything in the game can destroy it. Why can't you destroy Ram's swords or Ky's DC seals? Task seals already have a time limit, so I think making them destructible was just the dev's being a bit afraid of him being too much, which I honestly dont find to be the case.

Now everything I said is my opinion based on my experience, so its only really applicable at intermediate levels of play. Disagree or not its just my issues lol

[Destin]

Usually, top tier characters have a lot of unique or interesting options that make them appealing from a gameplay sense, just as many other characters do, if not more.

That REALLLLLLLLY depends on the game.  I would say, more often top tier characters have a very small amount of EXTREMELY powerful options, forcing other characters to use even less because of how restricting those options are.

 

Luckily, guilty gear does not often suffer from this.  Very often weaker characters have even more potential options because their moves are better balanced amongst themselves.  There is move balance, and character balance.  Guilty gear has some of the best move balance I have ever seen, there is a point for almost every button on every character, crazy!

[Coffeeling]

That REALLLLLLLLY depends on the game.  I would say, more often top tier characters have a very small amount of EXTREMELY powerful options, forcing other characters to use even less because of how restricting those options are.

 

Luckily, guilty gear does not often suffer from this.  Very often weaker characters have even more potential options because their moves are better balanced amongst themselves.  There is move balance, and character balance.  Guilty gear has some of the best move balance I have ever seen, there is a point for almost every button on every character, crazy!

 

This is a good concept. I prefer mobile characters with good move balance and generally lots of tools. If they're just a smidge overpowered, so much the better.

[D.R.F.]

I just wish that everyone picked characters they actually like, as opposed to "hey, this one's top tier, I'll go with that"

Guilty Gear has a lot more character loyalty in than most other games. That is STILL thanks to the fact that just about everyone character can compete at a competitive level. And hey, if people are just in it to win in they are gonna take the most cost effective way possible. It only makes sense.

[Vashimus]

A lot of what can make a game interesting or deep at high level for some people is what the best characters in the game bring to the table. One of my friends recently got interested in Xrd because he saw high-level Zato footage and thought it was sick as hell. High and top tiers usually have strong and interesting options that would appeal to many people, while those on the other side of the spectrum might have weaker or less interesting options. i.e. when you hear someone say "He's not bad by any means, he's just too honest in a game full of BS."

[StylisH]

Usually, top tier characters have a lot of unique or interesting options that make them appealing from a gameplay sense, just as many other characters do, if not more.

 

 

You know, there's this thing called preference. Where to someone the character being big and burly or having some other aesthetic is really important. For me, those important things are power, mobility and tools. => I end up playing top tier just about always.

 

 

But using not-so-used characters makes the players want to discover as much tech as they can, because others didn't or don't want to.

 

You all make good points, but there are a lot more bandwagoners in the FGC than most would admit, although Fenrir is right: character loyalty is pretty deep in Guilty.

[burningvigor]

I just wish that everyone picked characters they actually like, as opposed to "hey, this one's top tier, I'll go with that"

 

I think for GG that's usually the case.  Character loyalty seems to be really prevelent in the GG series.  My main was Bridget and I rocked him when he was Godlike(reload) to low tier (AC). 

 

But I can understand why people would like top tier chars.  I mean in general people like to win, so when you compare Zato / Millia options to say Potemkin... which char would you enjoy playing?  Someone with godlike oki pressure meterless, or a lumbering Giant that has to work to even get started?

 

Um what I'm trying to say is that top tiers are usually up there because of their tools and options, which in turn make them generally more fun to play with.  When I had a stick, I messed around with Eddie in AC, and holy shit did I feel strong as hell.  It's a nice feeling to be able to put so much pressure and control two chars at once, without even using meter. 

[StylisH]

I think for GG that's usually the case.  Character loyalty seems to be really prevelent in the GG series.  My main was Bridget and I rocked him when he was Godlike(reload) to low tier (AC). 

 

But I can understand why people would like top tier chars.  I mean in general people like to win, so when you compare Zato / Millia options to say Potemkin... which char would you enjoy playing?  Someone with godlike oki pressure meterless, or a lumbering Giant that has to work to even get started?

 

Um what I'm trying to say is that top tiers are usually up there because of their tools and options, which in turn make them generally more fun to play with.  When I had a stick, I messed around with Eddie in AC, and holy shit did I feel strong as hell.  It's a nice feeling to be able to put so much pressure and control two chars at once, without even using meter. 

 

Another solid point.  Damn I want my Dizzy back. I'd much rather play Zato than either Millia or Pot, but that'd be purely for fun factor, if not outright trolling;

[Poultrygeist]

Lol are you kidding me?  Are we really doing this again?  Potemkin being "unviable" was proven wrong so now we say Bedman sucks?  Have you considered that maybe people don't play him because his play style is super obtuse and he's just not very appealing to most people?  The last list puts him in the same standing as May and you know for damn sure that people play her.  Sorry if I sound mad but some of the posts in this thread are Eventhubs levels of black-and-white  "the higher/lower tier the character the more unbeatable/unviable they are."  

[D.R.F.]

Eventhubs lol

[Justice7541]

That reminds me, I should check out Eventhubs' crowdsourced Xrd tier list for some lulz.

[BloodWolF]

Those are always good for a laugh. I didn't know they had an Xrd one. Thanks.

[Destin]

 

I think for GG that's usually the case.  Character loyalty seems to be really prevelent in the GG series.  My main was Bridget and I rocked him when he was Godlike(reload) to low tier (AC). 

 

But I can understand why people would like top tier chars.  I mean in general people like to win, so when you compare Zato / Millia options to say Potemkin... which char would you enjoy playing?  Someone with godlike oki pressure meterless, or a lumbering Giant that has to work to even get started?

 

Um what I'm trying to say is that top tiers are usually up there because of their tools and options, which in turn make them generally more fun to play with.  When I had a stick, I messed around with Eddie in AC, and holy shit did I feel strong as hell.  It's a nice feeling to be able to put so much pressure and control two chars at once, without even using meter. 

When I played XX slayer I sure felt strong, but that ended up being a pretty shallow part of the enjoyment.  Like the pure raping of people got pretty boring after 10 minutes, and I knew it wasn't "me" out thinking them.  There is a lot said about this "play to win" mentality which seems short sighted.  I mean, we are playing to have fun.  Unless games hit the point where they are legitimate monetary sources (as of now they are an incredibly inefficient source), we are all at heart trying to enjoy ourselves.  Some people enjoy winning sure, but that is just a piece of the puzzle.  Why are you playing GG and not SF?  If you are only playing to win, why choose this specific game? IF just to win, you would bash on scrubs.  But many of us actively seek out advanced competition, increasing our chances of losing.  We have correctly deduced that deeper mindgames between two players lead to greater enjoyment.  What we really enjoy is solving problems, coming up with strategies, adapting on the fly.  

 

Now in some games it is true that higher tier characters are really the only way you can play the game in any capacity.  Extremely powerful moves can reduce the moveset of weaker characters to almost nothing, forcing repetition, leaving only the top tiers with any variety of moves to counter the other top tiers.   I played some Garou against old Kono Walchuck, and I played rock.  99% of my attack moves was stand jab hitconfirm light super because well, that was the only move rock had in his arsenal that could maybe do anything against the very powerful top tiers.  In CvS2, powerful pokes and roll cancels gutted the usable moves of middle to lower tier characters.

 

This isn't the case in guilty gear (pre AC, I don't know anything about AC really).  Low tier might lose because of damage or health, but they almost always still have a very large variety of tactics moves and depth that need to be used to succeed.  Assuming we can accept that, you can draw some interesting conclusions.  First, it is entirely possible to with just a small bit of mental effort to realize the difference in value of a victory over a good matchup and a bad matchup.  Also, it's possible to see improvement over absolute success.  If I see FAB go 4.5/5.5 against OGAWA, I know for certain FAB is the better player.  As in, he is using superior strategies, adapting faster, reading his opponent better, all those things we strive for and enjoy in fighting games.  By applying our own knowledge of matchups and relative tier listing, it is possible for us to understand our own level and improvement without a constant stream of number 1 character mirror matches.

 

In the reload days of Guilty gear, KBNova was one of the best players in the country.  Many regarded him as the best, he won many many tournaments and majors.  That being said, other players were also doing the rounds and were at least in the same league as KBNova as far as tournament wins.  What made him stand out is that he was playing anji, who was bottom 2 in #R.  It didn't take a rocket science for most of the scene to be able to correctly deduce that it was taking KBNova more work and skill to get where he was.  We were all capable of applying that knowledge to his results, and we respected him more as a player for that.  If he had been playing say Slayer there would have likely been absolutely no contest, he would have likely won every US based tournament.  But even though he didn't, it was understood the skill that went into playing Anji as well as he did.  This isn't even a respect the underdog situation.  This is, it takes cognitive dissonance to not realize which player is playing the game smarter.

 

The absolute value of winning in a game like this is pretty low.  If you really wanted to make money, at the very least play SF instead of GG.  If you are above the age of 20 and are really worried about how all your peers view your video game abilities, then I promise you there are other life skills and values you could work on that would make you infinitely more happy than grinding out that top tier in GG.  So assuming it's not that, why not learn to determine the relative value of a win and play someone that has a toolset that emphasizes strategy and adaption you enjoy?  

[BloodWolF]

 

 

Stuff

 

 

I especially like the first and last paragraphs. Well said.

[burningvigor]

When I played XX slayer I sure felt strong, but that ended up being a pretty shallow part of the enjoyment.  Like the pure raping of people got pretty boring after 10 minutes, and I knew it wasn't "me" out thinking them.  There is a lot said about this "play to win" mentality which seems short sighted.  I mean, we are playing to have fun.  Unless games hit the point where they are legitimate monetary sources (as of now they are an incredibly inefficient source), we are all at heart trying to enjoy ourselves.  Some people enjoy winning sure, but that is just a piece of the puzzle.  Why are you playing GG and not SF?  If you are only playing to win, why choose this specific game? IF just to win, you would bash on scrubs.  But many of us actively seek out advanced competition, increasing our chances of losing.  We have correctly deduced that deeper mindgames between two players lead to greater enjoyment.  What we really enjoy is solving problems, coming up with strategies, adapting on the fly.  

 

If you were raping everyone and felt content after 10 min, your competition wasn't that good, or you didn't let them adapt to you at all and dismissed them.  And yes it was you out thinking them because they couldn't figure out how to get around your backdash cancel stuff.  Playing to win is a basic fundamental thing about anything competitive.  Winning feels great, especially against someone better then you.  Also why are you bringing SF vs GG into this?  I thought this childish notion of "GG players are better than SF" players died out.

 

 

 

If I see FAB go 4.5/5.5 against OGAWA, I know for certain FAB is the better player.  As in, he is using superior strategies, adapting faster, reading his opponent better, all those things we strive for and enjoy in fighting games.

 

In the reload days of Guilty gear, KBNova was one of the best players in the country.  Many regarded him as the best, he won many many tournaments and majors.  That being said, other players were also doing the rounds and were at least in the same league as KBNova as far as tournament wins.  What made him stand out is that he was playing anji, who was bottom 2 in #R.  It didn't take a rocket science for most of the scene to be able to correctly deduce that it was taking KBNova more work and skill to get where he was.  We were all capable of applying that knowledge to his results, and we respected him more as a player for that.  If he had been playing say Slayer there would have likely been absolutely no contest, he would have likely won every US based tournament.  But even though he didn't, it was understood the skill that went into playing Anji as well as he did.  This isn't even a respect the underdog situation.  This is, it takes cognitive dissonance to not realize which player is playing the game smarter.

 

I really despise this mentality that if you use a low tier, it some how elevates you as a better player to someone using a high tier even if you lose.  Why are you assuming if KBNova picked a Top tier char he would have rofl stomped everyone else? 

 

 

 

The absolute value of winning in a game like this is pretty low.  If you really wanted to make money, at the very least play SF instead of GG.  If you are above the age of 20 and are really worried about how all your peers view your video game abilities, then I promise you there are other life skills and values you could work on that would make you infinitely more happy than grinding out that top tier in GG.  So assuming it's not that, why not learn to determine the relative value of a win and play someone that has a toolset that emphasizes strategy and adaption you enjoy?  

 

 

You play games for enjoyment and it just happens some enjoy the aspect of winning or playing a char that happens to be top tier.  Nothing wrong with that and age shouldn't be a factor. 

 

If you want to play a lower tier because you like that char, go right ahead, but don't use that as a crutch as to why you lost... or especially how much better you are for winning with that char.

[Destin]

If you were raping everyone and felt content after 10 min, your competition wasn't that good, or you didn't let them adapt to you at all and dismissed them. And yes it was you out thinking them because they couldn't figure out how to get around your backdash cancel stuff. Playing to win is a basic fundamental thing about anything competitive. Winning feels great, especially against someone better then you. Also why are you bringing SF vs GG into this? I thought this childish notion of "GG players are better than SF" players died out.

My competition was often the best players in the country. That didn't make the moves any less stupid. When my moves are completely invincible, not particularly punishable, and kill you in one hit that is not me out thinking them. Are you seriously arguing that winning with a higher tier character takes the same amount of skill as winning with a lower tier character, lol! And I bring up gg vs sf because if one was looking for notarity or money, that would be the appropriate venue. Victory is definitely relative, and because there is very little in the way of tangible rewards for victory, there is considerably less benefit for rocking out that higher tier. What is that victory giving you? Does it make ya feel good? Bump up those numbers on your ranked chart statistic?

I really despise this mentality that if you use a low tier, it some how elevates you as a better player to someone using a high tier even if you lose. Why are you assuming if KBNova picked a Top tier char he would have rofl stomped everyone else?

Despising something doesn't make it less true. Yes, the whole point of tiers is that if he had devoted similar time to a stronger character, he would have very very likely done better. Playing a low tier does not instantly elevate someone above a high tier player, but when looking at the results, it is one factor that you weigh in when determining the players skills at mind games, spacing, knowledge of the game ect. Now, it is not a weighted factor in determining ones skill at winning, as that is self defined!

You play games for enjoyment and it just happens some enjoy the aspect of winning or playing a char that happens to be top tier. Nothing wrong with that and age shouldn't be a factor.

If you want to play a lower tier because you like that char, go right ahead, but don't use that as a crutch as to why you lost... or especially how much better you are for winning with that char.

Yes actually, age is a factor. As we grow and hopefully mature, we are more able to determine the actual value of things we do in our life. When young, getting those V's may matter as you use it as a gauge for your own ability and self worth, I would hope later in life it would have very little effect on your ego. There is nothing wrong with playing a char who is high tier, I would argue that for the most part in gg tiers shouldn't have a large impact on your character decision.

I am sure you are able to see fighting game fundamentals in spite of character choice. Inability to see that could be someone underestimating the advantage their character holds, or overestimating the disadvantage their character has. But to say it isn't a weight in the discussion is silly.