Forum:Tier Lists, how are they made?

So, I've been told, time and time again, that tier lists are made to chart who would win in a fight against two players who are of equal skill. But, are they actually charted like this, or is it just a list of who wins more often in tournements? There seems to be a lot of debate about them, with people throwing out statements of why one charecter is better then another, what balances out their weaknesses, etcetera. But, all of this is pointless if we're just measuring who wins in tournements more often. If you guys really do care about the tiers being based on who would win if 2 players of equal skill playing as different charecters were fighting, shouldn't we just pit level 9 computers against eachother in 1 stock no item matches?

Of course, I'm not sure which stage you would use. It would have to be fair-symmetrical, no randomness, and no stage hazards that aren't symmetrical. Only -Final Destination -Battlefield -Some certain custom stages fit this description. Still, are the tier lists made like this? How are they made? If you really want to know which charecter is better then another, you should really pit them against eachother as level 9s, 1 stock, fair stage, no items. Just my opinion Paradox Juice (talk) 00:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

It's a list meant to predict who, in a matchup between players of equal skill on a neutral stage in tournament settings, would win. It's formed by an aggregate of tournament placings, and not limited to simply first place finishes. In theoretical arguments about who is a better character, for characters closely positioned on a tier list, people often argue about why one could character would be superior to other closely related characters.

But as far as computers go, absolutely not. A computer and a human do not at all play like each other. A very simple example of this would be, in Melee, computers didn't wavedash. High level players did. The best human players play far better than computers do. A tier list is most pertinent, in fact, it may be exclusively pertinent, to the highest levels of play, where the most advanced techniques and strategies are in use. And indeed, you are correct about stages. Not even Battlefield (and certainly not FD) is completely balanced. I did an extensive treatment of stage balance in an article I wrote for AllisBrawl. It's called Balancing Act; look it up if you have any further ruminations regarding stage balance, and it should answer any further questions. Semicolon (talk) 01:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but you'd be pitting a computer against a computer. However, you are still right, about the advanced techniques. Even a level 9 might not know that one little exploit that makes Jigglypuff kill all.

HOLD UP. WE'RE COMING TO YOUR RESCUE.
I have just announced...SLAPAHO EPIC #4:HOW TIERS ARE DECIDED

We think that this is a problem that many people in the community have; many people don't understand the way that tiers, are, in fact, decided. So, hold on to your seat, cause SLAPAHO is about to BLOW YOUR MIND  Semicolon (talk) 01:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

...Okay then. Do you have a link to where I can get my mind blown by SLAPAHO?
 * I don't think it is done, seeing as how it was just announced. Y462 (T • C  • E ) 23:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And to think he thought of it only in the span of 13 minutes, lolzer. - Hatake91 (talk) 23:53, 2 April 2009 (UTC)