289 réponses à ce sujet

[Original Twigman]

puldalpha wrote...

Original Stikman wrote...

puldalpha wrote...


Even if the DV is better then the T. Sentinal in the right hands, doesn't change the fact that there are many errors in the tier list, mostly headlined by the fact that the huntress is a B tier character when she is clearly better then several of the A tier characters he has listed which is my orignal cause of complaint.

I don't care if you are attempting to argue this, that is fine.

I am just eliminating the "Tsent is better than Drellgaurd" from your argument for the above, because it is simply not true, especially given the premise to which OP setup.

if the bottom 90% of the playerbase can play Tsent better than DV, but the top 10% can kill things with the DV better and faster than they can with the TSent, then you want to focus on the top 10%, not the bottom. The top 10% (or whatever percentage), is where the actual determination of character usefulness is going to be, not in the general population.

Very well, have a cookie for fighting with me through this

I don't eat sugar.

[puldalpha]

Original Stikman wrote...

puldalpha wrote...

Original Stikman wrote...

puldalpha wrote...


Even if the DV is better then the T. Sentinal in the right hands, doesn't change the fact that there are many errors in the tier list, mostly headlined by the fact that the huntress is a B tier character when she is clearly better then several of the A tier characters he has listed which is my orignal cause of complaint.

I don't care if you are attempting to argue this, that is fine.

I am just eliminating the "Tsent is better than Drellgaurd" from your argument for the above, because it is simply not true, especially given the premise to which OP setup.

if the bottom 90% of the playerbase can play Tsent better than DV, but the top 10% can kill things with the DV better and faster than they can with the TSent, then you want to focus on the top 10%, not the bottom. The top 10% (or whatever percentage), is where the actual determination of character usefulness is going to be, not in the general population.

Very well, have a cookie for fighting with me through this

I don't eat sugar.

[RedJohn]

 B
==============
Ex-cerb Adept
Asari Adept
Volus Vanguard
Quarian Marksman Sol
Salarian Engi
Human Vanguard
Batarian Vanguard 
Asari Huntress 
Turian Sol
Turian Sentinel
Turian Havoc
Batarian Sentinel

No..


There is something very, very wrong here...

Almost all characters there can be A+ characters starting from the old Turians until the Volus Vanguard.

[stefbomb]

Cyonan wrote...

himegoto wrote...
Any tier list is subjective. I don't completely agree with Daigo Umehara's SF4 tier listings and he's only one of the best players worldwide for the game.

The problem here though is most arguing in fact does not have a clue what a tier list is / What they are arguing against.
I still see some saying "well yeah, only if you can play the kit to its MAX potential"

Sighs.

You're the one that said the kits were being judged based on their full potential. Judging something on their full potential generally requires that the one doing the judging can actually play it at their full potential.

Then when people point out that you aren't using them to their full potential, you either reply in a condescending way, claim that they don't understand what a tier list is, or just ignore them.

As usual, Cyonan nails it.

[himegoto]

Cyonan wrote...

himegoto wrote...
Any tier list is subjective. I don't completely agree with Daigo Umehara's SF4 tier listings and he's only one of the best players worldwide for the game.

The problem here though is most arguing in fact does not have a clue what a tier list is / What they are arguing against.
I still see some saying "well yeah, only if you can play the kit to its MAX potential"

Sighs.

You're the one that said the kits were being judged based on their full potential. Judging something on their full potential generally requires that the one doing the judging can actually play it at their full potential.

Then when people point out that you aren't using them to their full potential, you either reply in a condescending way, claim that they don't understand what a tier list is, or just ignore them.

I gave plenty replies to those posts.
And a few others, like questioning how a Drellguard is above a Human Vanguard, or a GI is above a Tsent. Is too laughable and not worth the time with all due respect.

I play kits like the Vorchas, Drellguards to their full potential. But spin that around and I get attacked on "I clown them high only because I play well with them".
You must've seen the fair share of such posts already.

[MP-Ryan]

DarkAbsolution wrote...

With respect to MP-Ryan's post, to me, my preferred way to play the Phoenix Vanguard is as a charge area heavy melee build. THAT is where his strength is for clearing spawns. Charge DR + Heavy Melee DR, with the ability to charge again immediately after taking a shot or two at everything that's staggered around him, means that (to me) he is a wrecking ball that is every bit as strong as the Human Vanguard's Nova, except the Phoenix doesn't lose his barriers with his AoE Heavy Melee.

I'm well aware of this method of PV (I specc'd mine that way), but it doesn't change the fact that a player equally skilled in novaguard and smashguard is going to survive longer, synergize better, and do more overall damage on a novaguard.  That said, while the novaguard is objectively more useful, that does not imply you can't outscore a novaguard with a smashguard, and that some people won't do that consistently.  This is where himegoto's list falls down - he hasn't tried any objective measurements, so his list is not a tier list at all, but a collection of opinions (same as your opinion on the PV, as would be my assertion that the Slayer is probably the most effectively versatile of all the vanguards given the widest variety of cirumstances).

It's why tier-listing is silly - it's virtually impossible to find a player that can play every class at an equal skill level, unless you used someone who has started ME3 multi for the first time and never played a mass effect game previously.

My list above was not a serious ranking attempt (actual data is required for that), but rather a demonstration of how ranking could and probably should be done, and an example of what himegoto has not done and is now being heavily-criticized for.

[BjornDaDwarf]

himegoto wrote...

BjornDaDwarf wrote...

himegoto wrote...

MP-Ryan wrote...

himegoto wrote...
I rest my case. And to everyone who still don't understand what a tier list is.

Maybe you missed this.

I believe I was replying at BjornDaDwarf?

Yes, but MP-Ryan was pointing out that he has already made the same argument that I have.  Namely, that this isn't a "Tier List", as you keep lording that term and it's definition over everyone's head.

This is a subjective list of classes that you appear to do well with, do poorly with or favor/disfavor for some reason.  Virtually every time someone has used logic and facts to argue a position (such as DPS, diversity of powers, survivability, etc), your reply has been either condescending, an insistence that the commenter doesn't understand "tier lists" or both.  

I was actually interested in engaging in a conversation about the relative strengths and weaknesses of classes, but your list and attitude don't appear to support that as an option.  

himegoto wrote...

BjornDaDwarf wrote...

himegoto wrote...

BjornDaDwarf wrote...

Despite
your attempts to sell this as being objective (with your introduction),
the actual list comes off looking like a bunch of thoroughly random
personal choices (barring a few obvious ones).

Care to elaborate?

But no. This is a subjective list I thought I made that part clear.
What's objective is the role of a tier list because it's a unfamilar thing to folks who never played fighting VS games before.

Your
opening several paragraphs sell your list as being objective, not about
being a personal list at all.  In which case, it comes off as
laughable.  You also try to sell it as being immune to criticism
(insisting that people understand tier lists before criticizing), but
then break your own criteria in your explanations.  As an example, you perform well with two Vorcha classes, therefor they are S tier.  So it's okay for you to ignore the criteria you've defined for a Tier list, but it's not okay for anyone else to do it?  

I gave examples on the Vorchas, and also them in relation to other kits. Surely you cared to read that part?

Here's from my quote.

Vorcha soldier and sentinel ?
- Really tough to place. Wanted to
place them as A tier because some one hit kill attacks (not sync kills)
does pose problems due to low shield gate and always on health. Attacks
like the endless staggers from Geths or bs one hit kill beams from
Praetorians.
On second thought "always on health" means being able to
play more aggressive and with health regain means more uptime and DPS
dished out. One of my own beastly kits on gold+ matches, concluded my
decision as S tier.

They are S tier only because I performed well. Really?
I rest my case. And to everyone who still don't understand what a tier list is.

I made a reply to you. But it seems easier to quote another person's post to your advantage?

You make almost no sense.  The thing that you highlighted in red and your claims about the Vorcha actually provewhat I was saying, and yet you are somehow using that as a defense against my critique?  

I guess logic like that goes a long ways towards explaining the structure of your list.

[MP-Ryan]

puldalpha wrote...
To be honest, I would like to see your tier list based on the formula you have stated here

You find me people who can play every kit in this game at an equal level of skill to rank the four factors, and I'll crunch the numbers for you =)

[ShinTheZero]

==============
SSS (God Tier)
==============
GI
QMI (... why? He is not that better than the other Infiltrators)
TGI (TGI is still the best character in game, as it covers most areas of the game (Overload for Tech-Bursts, Stimpack for survivalability and damage, TC for damage and Turian passive for weapon stability)
Kroguard

==============
S (Top tier)
==============
N7 Destroyer
All Infiltrators EXCEPT Asari Huntress (wrong)
Drellguard (Guard over Adept? Seriously?)
Asari Valkyrie Sentinel (where is the fury? There are both extremly similar, so there shouldn't be a gap there)
N7 Demolisher
N7 Paladin
Krogan Soldier
Vorcha Soldier
Vorcha Sentinel

==============
A (High Tier)
==============
Human Engi (he is one of the best TE-Setups in the game; he is pretty even with the N7 Paladin)
Geth Engi
Quarian Male Engi
Volus Engi
Human Sentinel
Krogan Sentinel
Human Adept
Asari Justicar Adept
Drell Adept
Batarian Slasher Adept
Krogan Shaman Adept
Human / BF3 Sol (... what? Adrenalin Rush alone makes him pretty good)
Batarian Sol
Geth Trooper Sol (Flamer says hi, Bulky Tropper says hi ...)
Asari Vanguard
Ex-Cerb Vanguard
N7 Slayer
N7 Fury

==============
B
==============
Ex-cerb Adept
Asari Adept
Volus Vanguard
Quarian Marksman Sol
Salarian Engi (what? He is one of the best engineer in the game with ED and Decoy)
Human Vanguard
Batarian Vanguard
Asari Huntress (best Biotic class ever and she is in B-Tier, while the Valkyrie is way higher? Not really)
Turian Sol (Makes any weapon good, very similar to the N7 Destroyer, who only has the Magazine Size as unique. Also, his passives are very good)
Turian Sentinel (most versatile class and he is in B? Something is wrong here ... oh wait)
Turian Havoc
Batarian Sentinel

==============
C
==============
Volus Adept
Quarian Engi (she has Incinerate and Cryo Blast. She can spam Fire & Ice Explosions frequently)
Turian Saboteur Engi
Vorcha Hunter Engi
Volus Merc Sentinel


This list is pretty flawed. I suggest to rework it.

[Original Twigman]

stefbomb wrote...

Cyonan wrote...

himegoto wrote...
Any tier list is subjective. I don't completely agree with Daigo Umehara's SF4 tier listings and he's only one of the best players worldwide for the game.

The problem here though is most arguing in fact does not have a clue what a tier list is / What they are arguing against.
I still see some saying "well yeah, only if you can play the kit to its MAX potential"

Sighs.

You're the one that said the kits were being judged based on their full potential. Judging something on their full potential generally requires that the one doing the judging can actually play it at their full potential.

Then when people point out that you aren't using them to their full potential, you either reply in a condescending way, claim that they don't understand what a tier list is, or just ignore them.

As usual, Cyonan nails it.

While I agree with the fundamental flaws of the list, I don't think that it is "unfair" to judge a kit by its full potential.

Ex. In order to test optimal sprots performance (testing drug protcol, training regime, rest intervals, etc.) You wouldn't use average citizens in order to see "what works and what doesn't." You would use top olympic athletes performing at maximum potential, otherwise you would get results that are misplaced by mediocre performance factors.

[Bessy067]

Asari huntress is insanely good. She should be much higher than she currently is.

[Original Twigman]

ShinTheZero wrote...

==============
SSS (God Tier)
==============
 (... why? He is not that better than the other Infiltrators)
TGI (TGI is still the best character in game, as it covers most areas of the game (Overload for Tech-Bursts, Stimpack for survivalability and damage, TC for damage and Turian passive for weapon stability)

Drellguard (Guard over Adept? Seriously?)
Asari Valkyrie Sentinel (where is the fury? There are both extremly similar, so there shouldn't be a gap there)


This list is pretty flawed. I suggest to rework it.

While your conclusion isn't incorrect, the basis of your argument is.

1) TGI is not the "best" character in the game. Too much subjectivity to determine
2) Drellgaurd easily passess over the Adept. not much of a debate
3) if you think the asari Valkyrie equates with the fury, i suggest you check out Ashen Earth's and many PC player's gameplays of the Valkyrie with the reegar... they are not the same.

[OuterRim]

DarkAbsolution wrote...

himegoto wrote...

DarkAbsolution wrote...

Turian Sentinel, Batarian Vanguard, and Asari Huntress in B Tier.  You serious?

The problem with these Tier lists is that they are all purely subjective in the opinion of the poster.  Very few people agree wih other's subjective viewpoints, so I wonder why even bother posting the list?  If the list is how you view those characters, then good for you.  The list has no value to anyone else, because for the most part, it's just plain wrong with respect to other people's playstyles and experiences.

There are a small handful of characters which are outliers on the bell curve that the majority of people could likely agree upon as being placed where they are, but aside from the outliers, trying to organise everything in the middle is borderline futile.

BV is hard to place, A-B. But Tsent and Huntress as of now are definitely solid Bs.

Disagree strongly.  Not arguing with you about it more.

He's dead wrong. I can get consistent killstreaks with the Huntress. That isn't a B 'tier' kit.

But the huntress isn't the only thing he's wrong about.

Then again this is his list, and I don't know his playstyle. The huntress and many of the kits he has near the bottom may just not work as well for him. I know some of the ones he's got rated highly don't work well in my hands.

[Feneckus]

Useless list if you ask me.

A MQI is godly on Geth/Glacier but on Condor/Reapers, a Female Quarian Engineer will do just as well, if not better.

[Caligno]

Original Stikman wrote...
3) if you think the asari Valkyrie equates with the fury, i suggest you check out Ashen Earth's and many PC player's gameplays of the Valkyrie with the reegar... they are not the same.

This. These two kits are among my favorites in the entire game, and I play them both very differently. Their strengths are different enough that it's really not that applicable to compare them.

[Original Twigman]

OuterRim wrote...

DarkAbsolution wrote...

himegoto wrote...

DarkAbsolution wrote...

Turian Sentinel, Batarian Vanguard, and Asari Huntress in B Tier.  You serious?

The problem with these Tier lists is that they are all purely subjective in the opinion of the poster.  Very few people agree wih other's subjective viewpoints, so I wonder why even bother posting the list?  If the list is how you view those characters, then good for you.  The list has no value to anyone else, because for the most part, it's just plain wrong with respect to other people's playstyles and experiences.

There are a small handful of characters which are outliers on the bell curve that the majority of people could likely agree upon as being placed where they are, but aside from the outliers, trying to organise everything in the middle is borderline futile.

BV is hard to place, A-B. But Tsent and Huntress as of now are definitely solid Bs.

Disagree strongly.  Not arguing with you about it more.

He's dead wrong. I can get consistent killstreaks with the Huntress. That isn't a B 'tier' kit.

But the huntress isn't the only thing he's wrong about.

Then again this is his list, and I don't know his playstyle. The huntress and many of the kits he has near the bottom may just not work as well for him. I know some of the ones he's got rated highly don't work well in my hands.

Please tell me how....

btw, i agree, huntress is better. I still want to know how you get killstreaks with this character though as I can't think how...

[himegoto]

BreakJohn wrote...

the very fact im questioning your tier list demonstrates i know exactly how a tier list works. trust me i understand just because I do good with a certain kit doesn't make it top tier or vice versa if i do bad with a good kit doesn't make it low tier. these things have been around forever in the FG scene you should know since you've been there almost as long as i have, but they are also becomming common place in any type of game nowadays. plus this makes me think this is one of your first tier list if this is the way you take to a little criticism. obviously any tier list is subjective and people are GOING to question the placements but your answer shouldn't be "you guys don't undertand how tier list work!". granted some people in this thread don't i'll give you that much. also sorry if it came across that i completely disagree with this list, i don't. only a few of the kits in a few of the brackets(its only natural)

Noted.
Again kits like BV, GS or even the 2 Vorchas I acknowledged are tough to place. And when you know how a tier list works you'll also know none of the tier list goes in like a lengthy report.
It's meant for those top players who already mastered the game for the most part. In my case I've played gold since beta and launch, maxed the manifest months ago, spending credits on reset cards to try out on new build ideas.

Anyone who disagrees with my tier lists should first go into my sig to look at and disagree with my builds; Have at least a near-maxed manifest; Frequents gold and platinum games.
But before all that it needs to be understood what a tier list is. Not to condescend but to try to bring people on the same page.

I have no problem to debate with people who knows what they are talking about. Or if those people disagree with my tiers.

[stefbomb]

The only real way to get any sort of "objective" list would involve crunching numbers with internal BioWare game statistics (e.g. average/highest score and popularity of each class in Gold).

[stefbomb]

Original Stikman wrote...

OuterRim wrote...

DarkAbsolution wrote...

himegoto wrote...

DarkAbsolution wrote...

Turian Sentinel, Batarian Vanguard, and Asari Huntress in B Tier.  You serious?

The problem with these Tier lists is that they are all purely subjective in the opinion of the poster.  Very few people agree wih other's subjective viewpoints, so I wonder why even bother posting the list?  If the list is how you view those characters, then good for you.  The list has no value to anyone else, because for the most part, it's just plain wrong with respect to other people's playstyles and experiences.

There are a small handful of characters which are outliers on the bell curve that the majority of people could likely agree upon as being placed where they are, but aside from the outliers, trying to organise everything in the middle is borderline futile.

BV is hard to place, A-B. But Tsent and Huntress as of now are definitely solid Bs.

Disagree strongly.  Not arguing with you about it more.

He's dead wrong. I can get consistent killstreaks with the Huntress. That isn't a B 'tier' kit.

But the huntress isn't the only thing he's wrong about.

Then again this is his list, and I don't know his playstyle. The huntress and many of the kits he has near the bottom may just not work as well for him. I know some of the ones he's got rated highly don't work well in my hands.

Please tell me how....

btw, i agree, huntress is better. I still want to know how you get killstreaks with this character though as I can't think how...

Probably with a melee build.

[Original Twigman]

stefbomb wrote...

The only real way to get any sort of "objective" list would involve crunching numbers with internal BioWare game statistics (e.g. average/highest score and popularity of each class in Gold).

You would need to have statistics run for each class using the best players in the world. Popularity should have nothing to do with a tier.

Also, statistics are just a single perspective that leaves out many key elements.

Objectivity is an ideal, not a reality, in science.

[MP-Ryan]

The trouble, as I keep saying, is that your "maximum possible effectiveness" criterion appears to have no basis, giving your list no credibility or rationale.

Saying you're using a measure like that to do your ranking implies that you have some basis for these ranks, but all most of us (who I assure you know how objective ranking systems work) are seeing is your opinions.

See my lengthy post on page 4 for one possible methodology to approach making a tiered ranking (which still contains an element of subjectivity, but isn't based exclusively on opinion).

Modifié par MP-Ryan, 28 décembre 2012 - 10:29 .

[Original Twigman]

[quote]stefbomb wrote...


[/quote]
Probably with a melee build.

[/quote]

Thats the only way I figured, but I still want to hear it out. I have never used a melee build, but I assume it is not as effective as a power/weapon build for her.

Will probably use the melee build for lulz and Combat mastery again

[JewelsWinnfield]

Kroguard = SSS
Batguard = B
Hendrix137 = Confused

They can be played almost the same if you use a Reegar build...

[cato potato]

I thought all tier lists were subjective by their very nature, no? Still interesting to see how other people rate all the characters in this game but until everyone can agree what max potential is for every character then I can't really see the utility of the list.