User talk:I am ROB

Why are you so stuck on describing Smash 64 Captain Falcon as being better than Melee Captain Falcon? Multiple people have expressed opposing views to you already... Don't you think it's a little more agreeable to just call it a similar placing (3/12 vs. 6/26), and leave it at that? Why do you think some YouTube content creator coming up with a formula to score *all* characters across the entire series out of 100 is an effective way of assessing this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.41.56 (talk • contribs) 18:54, May 5, 2026 (EDT)

This formula is valid for placements. This is due to multiple factors, including how this wiki already sees every first place in the same placement (Brawl Meta Knight being at the same placement as Project M Meta Knight), and the same goes for last place (Melee Bowser being at the same placement as Project M Bowser, and Brawl Ganondorf being at the same level as Ultimate Ganondorf). Additionally, the distance between character placements in a tier list is identical for every character in the tier list, and does not take tier grading, the number below, or their viability into account (which is why Project M Kirby's placement is not equivalent to Melee Kirby's placement despite both being the second-worst, as there are more fighters to push the distance between placements). This is what I mean when Smash 64 Captain Falcon is ranked better (not necessarily more viable) than Melee Captain Falcon. When Pikachu and Fox share the same ceiling, and Luigi and Bowser share the same floor, then what I said is true. And finally, it seems like you are the only person to express opposing views to the formula I'm sure the wiki is already using (given my three examples); I haven't seen anyone else give an opposing view to this (Cookies & Creme, the only other person on the discussion, expressed neutral views at worst).

I am willing to note their placements as "similar" (similarly to Mario between Smash 64 and Melee due to the latter being slightly lower that the former), and I will admit that some of the placements on these tier lists are due to their uneven divisions (because every Smash game has a different number of fighters) preventing accurate matches between games, making a potentially even match end in one game's favor (like 64 Kirby ≠ opposite Melee Kirby, Melee Jigglypuff ≠ opposite Brawl Jigglypuff, Brawl Olimar ≠ opposite Project M Olimar, and Melee Kirby ≠ Project M Kirby, due to those games having tier lists with differing amounts of fighters, even though Melee Bowser = Project M Bowser, Brawl Meta Knight = Project M Meta Knight, and Brawl Ganondorf = Ultimate Ganondorf because both the wiki and the formula show them at the absolute bottom/top, sharing the exact same floor/ceiling). As such, I am open to changing Captain Falcon from being better in 64 to being even (although Melee Falcon being ranked higher than 64 Falcon is still flat-out wrong, even if he is more viable there). But my point still stands; placements do depend on where a fighter stands on a tier list, devoid of other factors. That's how I see it, and that's apparently how the wiki sees it. My name... ...is R.O.B. 23:47, May 5, 2026 (UTC)

You are the only one here that thinks some YouTuber's method of dividing and multiplying by 100 is at all valid, or holds any weight at all in the matter. The tier list page also explicitly states it reports on what's given, and only uses authoritative sources. The Project M tier list is not official, or on the tier list article. The distance between characters on official tier lists for Smash releases isn't identical, as has been stated multiple times now. Ganondorf and Zelda in Smash 4 are placed as a tie, for example. It's only you who thinks the decimal values for tier list placements holds no weight whatsoever, or is "a whole can of worms I don't want to open". There is likely also plenty of best/worst placements edits which predate that YouTube video release from over a year ago - so no, it's not an authoritative source on the matter.

You need to actually read and take in everything that is being said. You have one I.P guest early on in your tier list discussion stating that "it's otherwise inconsistent", you have a different I.P guest later on implying we should "let it [stay as is] as other people would argue about that" - furthermore, on the actual Melee Captain Falcon article, you have in the articles edit history a user editing in that Melee Falcon is *greater* than Smash 64 Falcon, "approximately 1.81th percentile higher", because as I said people are doing their own math, and also a follow-up edit from a user saying that they think this level of tier change analysis is not useful on something so subjective.

Calling it a similar rank in the article and leaving it at that is almost certainly the least contentious, and most sensible solution. 135.23.41.56 03:14, May 6, 2026 (UTC)