Template talk:MeleeTiers

Template:MeleeTiers/12 is done
I think it should be alright. Once it is, feel free to put it over it. F0rZ3r0F0r (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Colorizing
I did that deliberately. The community created SS/S and A/B tiers, yes, but they were grouped together under top and high tiers, respectively. That leads me to believe that we should show that by putting those groups under the same color, instead of colorizing normally and leading people to believe that the community thinks S and B are decisively below SS and A. --Timson622222 (talk) 06:08, 11 December 2015 (EST)
 * We have always coloured the lists based on the tiers themselves and nothing more (e.g. any higher-level groupings have always been ignored). Besides, the numbers are included, so people can see exactly how far apart everything is. Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Victorious 09:40, 11 December 2015 (EST)

13th Tier List Coloring
Apologies if I'm not doing this properly, I've never written on a wiki before. I'm PracticalTAS and I was one of the producers of the 13th tier list. I contacted Toomai on Twitter about a change he made to the presentation of the list and he suggested that I take it on-wiki, so here I am.

When we were producing the list, we made the choice to go with 6 tiers, but to have sub-tiers within the B and C tiers (displayed as +/-) to denote that those tiers were more dispersed than the others. We used k-means clustering to define the tier split, and chose the specific k after looking at several options. I wrote up the list using SSBWiki's table formatting (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a33wGcfaoujNVdD6QQBU2a9suIuJZyWI_uM8eKUz4GI/) with 6 colors and the +/- distinctions present, to denote this.

Toomai standardized the list to follow the system of one color per named tier that the other tier lists use, which is understandable.

However, I'd like to request that either:


 * the change be reverted, as the list has k=6 tiers; with k=8, the clustering algorithm would produce a different split between what are currently D and F tiers and thus a further modified list, or
 * the list be modified further to display only B and C tiers, without the +/- distinctions shown, and have +/- distinctions be covered in the blurb below.

The former is preferred, as it matches how we wish for the information to be presented, but the latter is also preferable over the current version as it displays the correct number of tiers.

Regards,

PracticalTAS (talk) 11:12, May 26, 2021 (EDT)


 * Support option 1: No reason not to go with it especially considering it's being recommended as such by the main person who worked on the tier list. Señor Mexicano   (talk)  12:03, May 26, 2021 (EDT)
 * I definitely like option 1. Makes it more clear that the characters are still in the same tier despite the +/- denotation. Cookies CnC Signature.png Creme  12:06, May 26, 2021 (EDT)
 * Option 2. The current standard is one colour per tier, and one tier per colour, primarily for ease of recognition (e.g. avoids confusion of "no other list has multiple tiers sharing a colour, so why does this one get special treatment"). Any "sub-tiers" can be explained in the prose. I do not want to establish a precedent of breaking our standards simply because the original maker wants something to look a certain way. Toomai Glittershine Toomai.png The Prismatic 17:04, May 26, 2021 (EDT)
 * I dunno, I'm with Toomai on this one. It creates more separation, because the point is that, despite it being subtiers, they're still separated. I'm in support of option 2. Aidan,  the Rurouni  18:00, May 26, 2021 (EDT)
 * I don't think having the option to use the same color for sub-tiers is necessarily ad-hoccing. It could potentially be applied to any tier list that uses sub-ranks like the last Brawl tier list or a potential future Ultimate tier. If this is not possible or undesirable however, I am in favor of leaving it as is. I think it would be less confusing for the reader to see the sub-ranks separate in color in the table (with the +/- notation already hinting that they are part of a single rank) and the text explaining that, than if they were merged and the text appearing to contradict this by stating that there are sub-tiers that do not appear in the table. --Rdrfc (talk) 05:54, May 27, 2021 (EDT)