Ah…the tier list. Both the infinite resource and bane of all competitive gaming communities. Greetings Dragonballers, Didier here with what I hope to be a good discussion. Freestylin’ with a Frenchman will continue next time as the fail count is rising with my Krillin Free deck play testing, but no one expects anything from him anyway.
A bit about myself and why I think tiers are such an important subject to talk about. DBZ was one of my first competitive games, but nowhere near my last. Other games I’ve played competitively with moderate success include Pokemon, YuGiOh, World of Warcraft, Super Smash Bros, and League of Legends. In all these games, tier lists run rampant. This is especially true for League of Legends (League) and Super Smash Bros (SSBs) as these games have entire websites dedicated to their lists and the development of them.
The approach that I usually take in games is that of the underdog. I play Ness (Tier G) in SSBs; with whom I used to win several tournaments and ended one undefeated. In the short lived Re-Z card game, I brought a ludicrous Krillin Non-Tokiwaza deck that I got 5th at one of the only Re-Z regionals in Michigan and more recently the Vegeta Freestyle last year at GenCon. This year sure will be fun.
The point of all this is that I’ve had great success in going against the grain with tiers. And I do this purposefully. Not because I have something against tier 1 decks, characters, or builds, but instead I try to show others that they mean less than some state they do. It is my personal opinion that tier lists are toxic to a competitive environment, in that they promote tunneling players into overdone ideas that snuff out creativity and personality. This is especially true for newer or less experienced players who often see these lists as absolute.
What is a tier list?
A tier list is something that happens in any competitive game naturally and is inevitable. Someone is always going to give their opinion on what’s best and why. At its core, a tier list is simply a breakdown of what is considered superior in terms of game mechanics only when compared to other characters/decks; removing the ideas of hard or soft counters and personal play. These lists rather look at the limits of power or what the game allows you to mechanically do. If two people of equal skill are put against each other with a different deck or character, who would win?
It’s important to note here that game companies won’t touch these lists or endorse them. I have never heard (tell me if you have) of a company releasing an official tier list for a game, instead it is always members of the competitive community who theorycraft over these concepts. Most competitive games change quite rapidly over time with card games releasing new sets and online games patches. This makes it redundant for a company to waste resources on something like this. Leave that to the players, we have too much free time anyway.
Since perfect balance inside a game is nearly impossible, a tier list (or at least an understood power breakdown) will exist for most. Some lists are more correct than others. It is up to the player and the community to interpret the information and take it for its worth. Note the source, note the assumptions. Does the tier list assume you play alone? With friends? A specific game mode? Has the player who wrote it had a lot of competitive experience with a variety of builds? Are opposing opinions considered? A person who tunnels others into his ideas alone and does not consider outside sources creates a very narrow tier list.
Not all tier lists are created equal
Disclaimer – Below are tier lists used for example purposes only. These are inaccurate and only partly represent my opinions.
The last section ended with me touching on how subjective tier lists are. Which they are. Anyone can make one and mine will be much different from yours. What I want to discuss here is how these lists differ across gaming as a whole. A game’s tier list is essentially a physical representation of it’s overall balance and if we compare a few of them, there’s a lot we can learn.
Take a look at the two tier lists posted above. Which one of these would represent a more balanced game? You may be tempted to say Dragonball since there exists both more items in tier 1 and there is less of a jump between the upper tiers. Let me present this information another way:
Now this makes the verdict more difficult. While Dragonball does have the things mentioned above going for it, there’s just a huge section that sits in tier 4 while League has approximately 95% of it’s game tight inside tiers 2 and 3. Granted being a card game versus having a set number of characters makes these two difficult to compare; you could make a 1-4 Frieza anger deck if you really wanted to. This however doesn’t change the fact that power distribution represents balance. So what makes for a balanced game?
As any game progresses, it gets more complex. This is often called “power creep” and just describes the phenomenon that mechanics become repetitive and less fun as games mature and will no longer interest players so new ones must be invented. How a game implements these new mechanics and refreshes old ones has a direct link to overall balance and the distribution of tiers. This is one thing League has done extremely well in my opinion; they continually rework older characters to maintain their level of balance.
So what’s the point? Any statistician will tell you that outliers are both very important and irrelevant at the same time. Overpowered characters in a game can be toxic if you let them. I’ve never been to a SSBs National Tournament, but if I had I’m sure the bracket would look something like what was posted above.
“Ok guys, new champion idea. He has a skill that isn’t affected by any defenses”
“Go on”
“Ok, then its an execute that increases in damage over time”
“Keep going!”
“Not enough? How about it resets its cool down if it kills someone?”
“So an unmitigated self-refreshing execute? This can’t go wrong!”
Enter Darius
While Darius is game breaking and rage inducing when played by anyone with fingers, his presence doesn’t make League imbalanced as a whole. In my opinion, a balanced competitive game is one with a diverse environment that promotes the use of all the game has to offer; a full spectrum. In terms of tiers, this is not only having an even spread of characters/builds across tiers but is also minimizing the gaps that exist between each tier. So while Darius is a head above the rest of the League, he is only one. The majority sits close in terms of power.
The Noob Trap
So now that you are an expert on the concept of tiers and what they represent…or are just confused…let’s bring it back down and talk about what the hell all this actually can be used for. I said in the first line of this article that tier lists are both the infinite resource and bane of games. The infinite part being above, there are a lot of misconceptions about the information that is actually gained by looking at one of these lists:
“If I use something in tier 1, I will beat everything in lower tiers”
This is immediately false if you just consider all the things a tier list doesn’t include (remember, mechanics only). There’s a slew of reasons you become the victor over someone. Some of them have nothing to do with what you’re playing with or against! Thinking like this will put you on the fast track to a big fat ‘L’. Letting your mind rest assured that you have the advantage in your deck/character choice will only lead to sloppy play.
Sometimes things just aren’t going to pan out for you inside a competition. Be it bad draws, a game changing oversight, or a hand spasm there are happenings beyond your control. So leave behind the ideas of tiers once you sit down and square off; focus on nothing but the ‘W’. Competition is cold and unforgiving. There is no honor on the battlefield. So who cares if your opponent hasn’t hit puberty yet? Send that 10-year-old back home to his mom.
“If I want to compete, I have to use something in tier 1” or “Tier 1 is all that matters”
The main problem here is that this assumes the tier list is correct. On funny example I have challenging this was after a SSBs tournament finals in which I went undefeated with Ness. After losing, my young but hilariously confident opponent started some side matches with friends using…of course…Ness. “No wonder you beat everyone he’s so easy to use! So overpowered!” The fact that he was just outplayed never came up. He must of gotten Super Sonic four times in that final match.
A tier list is a person’s take and on what is best through one perspective. This is highly subjective. Tier lists ideally remove bias since they are based on mechanics only, but we all know that’s impossible. Given this fact, my ‘tier 1’ may not be so hot in your hands and vice versa. We all have our own play style and our character choices should reflect this. It is much better for you to follow this path than play a deck because someone, somewhere won a tournament once.
“Tier lists are comprehensive” or “All possible tier 1 things have been found”
I can’t help but laugh when I hear someone say this. League has over 100 champions with around 50 items each character builds six of. That’s billions of combinations. Dragonball has seven fighting styles, multiple masteries per style, tens of main personalities, and over 1,500 cards. Again, billions. How can you say you’ve seen all sides of a dice with more than you can count in a lifetime?
The best example I think contesting this was something I witnessed in League happening between NA and Chinese players and a champion named Ezreal. Stateside, Ezreal was widely considered a troll pick and at the bottom of his tier. I was on the receiving end of this as players would refuse to play and flame me for choosing him. Meanwhile a few time zones away in China, players were breaking the game with Ezreal. He was all they played and other champions couldn’t touch him. He was first picked or banned every game. Same game, different environment. And it was like this for months. Who was right? Ezreal was nerfed shortly after the Chinese started dominating qualifiers and he became widely popular in NA as a result.
I have TONS more examples on how this statement just doesn’t hold up but I won’t bore you. The point is, tier lists are a snapshot of an opinion when they are written and should be taken as such. As new information is revealed, adjustments need to be made. And if these list change so easily how can they be taken as absolute? You can’t be both comprehensive and shift with time; they counteract. Take them off that pedestal.
So what are tier lists used for then?
The last thing I want to do is have you finish this article thinking tier lists are useless. Much like women and domestic violence, they have their place. They are a tool we can use to our advantage and they do provide us insight.
Going into any major competition, you can guarantee someone will be playing these tier 1 characters. Accept this and prepare for it. Because you know people will be playing them, whatever you’re playing has to be able to beat them. I’m all for challenging the status quo but you won’t see me with Hercule-Goku fusion energy beats in August. If the thing you’re doing loses against all tier 1 and tier 2 characters, chances are you won’t be getting very far.
Use the tiers as a standard rather than a list of what you should play. They are placed there for a reason. I mock Broly Saiyan only because I hate how good it is. When I playtest, I work my decks up to facing the tier 1s. As you iterate versions of a new deck or build, improving over time and developing the way its played, ask more of it and don’t run from a matchup that looks grim. Remember, competition is for the strong willed. Your opponent is not going to be holding anything back.
A tier list reflects game balance and sets power standards for competition and nothing more. It is when players fall for any of the noob traps listed above that these lists become toxic to the environment. Don’t let this happen to you! Are you really playing a game if you just blindly take other’s opinions as truth? Creativity is such an important and often forgotten skill that we all could use more of. Every gamer has the potential to create something new. So break the mold! Challenge the tier list! As Tier Lists 101 with comes to a close, I will continue to try and think outside the box in all the games I play and I hope reading this inspired you to do the same.
This really could be an article all by itself, but when throwing out the word “noob” I think a distinction should be made between a “noob” and a “scrub”.
Noobs don’t understand the tiers or what’s competitive because they are new, and that’s ok. Those are the folks who one day could be the top players in a game as everyone starts here.
Scrubs are a bit more difficult. They could be the player who “just plays for fun” and doesn’t care to understand or bother with tiered decks. That’s ok. Then you have the scrub that is just a bad player even though they have played for a long time. They just don’t get or see combo’s, make questionable choices when building decks etc. They might take a Tier 1 idea (say Broly Saiyan) and just build it all wrong.
Now that’s the first type of scrub, but then you get into the douchy scrub. The scrub who is a bad player but thinks they are the best and constantly claims how they could beat so and so even though they never played in a real event. There’s no hope for them and much like “good” players who are douchy and do the same thing, but is exacerbated because they actually do win, but they may just power game and play the cheesiest thing possible and never give help or advice to the noobs or scrubs who are generally interested in getting better and having fun at the same time.
Sorry for getting off topic of tiers but words like noob I think sometimes get used interchangeably with what’s common thought of as a scrub (and both are related to the idea of tiers and who plays them and determines them).
I’m glad you brought this up, I half intended on saying something myself so it’s good you did, but noob here definitely just mean’s ‘a new player’; no negativity intended. We were all noobs once and we get to relive that feeling every time we learn a new game.
This community has it share and full range of personalities and that’s great! It wouldn’t be as fun if we all just shook hands and went out for drinks. Friction creates heat 😉
And this is 100% why you can’t have a heart once you square off in a competition. Because there are players who just don’t.
Nice article, lol @ Krillin Freestyle (it seems so good on paper, something is missing in the execution?)
I’ve tried Krillin Freestyle using WGS lv3 (as have others) that just gets a bunch of named cards in discard pile then hits a KHSB and wins. But the problem I ran into was what if in the process of getting all those cards into the discard pile, the KHSB goes with em? Then you have to try and get them back. Or you get one into your hand and then they Staredown it. ETC ETC.
Yea, you would think a deck revolving around taking a beating would thrive in an environment where beatdown rules…
I’m close though, it works well so far. Last round of playtesting upcoming.
Yeah I was gonna use it at our St. Louis Tuff Enuff, but I ended up not being able to playtest and fix the issues I mentioned so I just ended up using my standard deck in TE as well (Evil Buu Red CS speed beats).
I don’t want to get into it too much (writing that article after all) but I’ve found that since Krillin sucks at a lot of things, but tries to do a lot, you need to give yourself more win conditions than just crutching on Heat Seeking.
Word. I”ve been doing brief deck articles on the Midwest Championship Series Facebook page. Maybe one of those types for Krillin are in order here LOL.
Krillin Freestyle + Power Tap + Devastation Drill + Krillin’s Over Head Smack and Quick Quicks = Krillin punching your ass in.
“As any game progresses, it gets more complex. This is often called “power creep” and just describes the phenomenon that mechanics become repetitive and less fun as games mature and will no longer interest players so new ones must be invented.”
That’s not what power creep means.
Power creep means that cards in one set are stronger than the ones in the last, especially for games without block formatting. This is so you have incentive to buy the new stuff. It might include new mechanics to nudge the creep along, but the “creep” part implies a direction.
Wiki:
Power creep is the gradual unbalancing of a game due to successive releases of new content.The phenomenon may be caused by a number of different factors and, in extreme cases, can be damaging to the longevity of the game in which it takes place.
As new expansions or updates are released, new game mechanics or effects are introduced, making it increasingly difficult for older content to remain in balance without changes. Usually, this means new content releases grow successively more powerful while older content becomes regressively outdated or relatively underpowered.
Joel’s right. Wiki uses an overly generic definition, but the second paragraph agrees with him. “New content grows more powerful, older content becomes outdated.” Compare how even in Cell Saga, a vanilla block was Stop X attack, Raise/Lower your/opponent’s anger 1 level. Vanilla blocks in Buu had those same effects, but then also added things such as discard/remove a drill, remove cards in discard pile, gain power stages, grab a card from the discard pile, etc. It completely invalidates the older card, with the only possible reason for using the old one being if its name allows it in a theme deck.
“Power creep means that cards in one set are stronger than the ones in the last, especially for games without block formatting.”
I don’t really understand the argument, I feel like we’re all talking about the same thing here. My definition nearly matches Wiki as does Joel’s.
And Wiki isn’t overly generic. It’s generic enough to apply to gaming, rather than just card games.
I think I got it. When I talked about power creep, I made it sound like it was guaranteed in the progression of the game because I called it when a game get’s more complex over time.
This is not correct, power creep is what you said it is that is caused by a game getting more complex.
Games do always get more complicated as they progress, but do not always have power creep.
Guess I should have read this 101 times before posting HA!
+1. At least when it came to DBZ. You can have power creep and still have a balanced game. Wiki explanation is very generic and baised (by my guess) a conservative designer). Stronger stuff != Unbalancing, and just because a card is replaced by a better version doesn’t = unbalanced.
But then again, I guess that brings up the whole argument about what “Balanced” and “Unbalanced” means, as it seems everybody’s definitions are different (like “broken” and “OP”).
Good article none-the-less, would love to see more like this. Question: In your diagrams you have 7 decks as Tier 1/”World Champion decks”. Which ones are those?
Chippy
To piggy back off of Chippy on the Seven Tier 1 claim, what format? I believe Standard Score DBZ and Retro DBZ are two different sets of tiers IMO.
It’s not that they were world championship decks. I just called them that to stay thematic of the world tournament. World champion, runner up, junior champion, and Hercule of course who got beat by everyone.
I really didn’t put much thought into the DBZ tier list to be honest which is why there was a disclaimer. The last thing I want to do is act like an expert on this. I have just as a limited perspective as I talk about in the article. I just said “Yea, there are probably like 7 decks that are above the rest.”
I figured if we wanted to make a tier list, we could come together and try and do that. If you twisted my arm, *my* T1 would probably be:
Broly Saiyan Beatball, Bojack Black Beats, Roshi Ball (Non-TW / Blue), Roshi/SWK (Orange / Non-TW?) OVA, Buu Black Beats, Buu Red Anger, really anything with Buu as an MP lmao!
To me, I nearly see no reason to talk about anything other than standard retro rules as this is GenCon and its become sort of a pseudo nationals.
That’s why I asked about Score Z or Retro Z: I believe in Retro the list is much smaller. I would go as far as to put only three things as Tier 1 in Retro: Buu Black or Red and Broly Saiyan. Why? On a coin flip they can go first and wreck your shit bad if you are playing ball or control and draw three things that don’t include a stop all. Which happens A LOT (which I’ve discovered from playing Black and Red Buu). Bojack is I think in Tier 1 but I’m personally not completely sure.
I would put Roshi Blue or Non-TW Ball, Black Control Ball/Carpet and OVA as Tier 2 along with Goku Freeball and various Free Beats (Buu again). Now you have the three Tier 1 decks but using anyone other than Broly or Buu and those are squarely Tier 2.
I think in Retro Tier 2 is very wide. It’s just that if you took any of these and put them against Buu Black, Red or Broly Saiyan and maybe Black Bojack, I would just have to favor the Buu, Broly and Bojacks of the world granted the decks are competently built and piloted by skilled hands.
All to often will I see someone “trying” to build and play a Tier 1 deck, but execute it all wrong. Like Broly Saiyan using the say WGS Mastery and lots of non-styled stuff for example or something of the sort.
Now the above is all my personal opinion of course and I will SURELY be hotly contested. But I think it’s still worth while discussing what is currently Tier 1, 2, etc.
I personally see power creep as meaning closer to what Sayjin alluded to but I understand the point Didier was intending to make in his article.
Well I can contest your reasoning for excluding everything but Buu and Broly by saying your main argument for no Ball/Control is drawing poorly first turn, but if you notice all the Ball/Control I listed were Roshi, which this really doesn’t apply with.
I include Bojack (trying oh so hard to not let my loss affect me!) because…Fashbinder put out INSANE damage with incredible consistency with that deck. More damage than I’ve ever seen another deck do. He must have realistically ‘killed’ me two or three times in our match.
Consistency to me is the main thing that makes a deck T1. And I knew Bojack was strong in Kid Buu, but expanded came so quickly it was hard to judge.
See until the last event we had in STL I would have agreed with you on Roshi, but I came across a Roshi Ball and a Roshi OVA that I just had to keep declaring and eventually they ran across a top six that was a janky mix of drills, non-combats and stuff like Sphere or Drills are for the Weak. That’s all it takes to lose against Buu. Other people who post here can attest to Red Buu being able to put out INSANE amounts (single combats in excess of 60 life cards conservatively) of damage itself and it packs all the answers it needs built in (Red Lighting Slash, Red Face Upheaval, Red Face Slap, Red Energy Blast, Red King Cold Observation, Human Extinction Attack in the Sensei etc). Black and Saiyan have their own respective piles of removal and tech.
Part of me wants to put Bojack in tier 1 and part of me doesn’t. Obviously Bojack can fire off quickly with South Kai and an early ally searcher BUT at the same time, he still needs those allies to be effective so there is some sort of gimmick involved in it.
Booo on no Edit. If I were to call the top three Black Buu, Red Buu, Saiayn Broly I would say that Black beats Red Buu (discard Red’s hand and it can’t do jack), and Saiyan beats Black Buu (Even if Black Buu has 3 cards in his hand that get rid Broly’s hand, Broly normally still has 3-4 cards left in his hand depending on what level he’s at). Then I think Broly beats Red Buu as well but it depends on who goes first alot of the time. Broly getting a 5 card hand first turn and leveling up the same turn as well is just a lot to deal with.
Just saiyan’ on the power creep thing. Wasn’t agreeing/disagreeing with the statement (or anything else in the article), just pointing out the misnomer for anyone unfamiliar with nerd terminology.
And it’s not so much complexity as value per card slot. Like Geoff said, identical card slots (random red blocks) started getting additional effects between CS and MBS. It was subtle and done properly.
If you want to see it done totally fucking wrong, go look at YuYu and Bleach. (imo, I might not actually know what I’m talking about)
Hey, Yu Yu had a new designer for each set practically. It would have been a true miracle if that game came off ok and balanced. =p Gotta give props for the team trying to save it past Set 3, tho. They worked furiously on trying to fix it.
Chippy
No way! Point any inconsistencies out please.
This whole article is basically defining nerd terminology so it needs to be accurate.
For those saying that Buu/Broly/Bojack are the only Tier 1 decks in “Retro” rules, is it purely because of the “first turn blow up”? Would they still be considered Tier 1 if DPR was still in effect?
Chippy
Considering I don’t think really anyone played Buu back in the day due to it being a guaranteed second turn I’d say yes.
Even so I’d still rather a different DPR be made rather than returning to the old. Somewhere in between?
Yes, with DPR I would probably never play Buu. With NO DPR, I don’t see any point in not playing him. Amazing base, versatile powers, Tech built into his named cards, Aura Clash doesn’t bother him. Just what is there not to like?
Likewise, I think Broly is even BETTER in Score Z as he gets to go first, at full against ALOT of personalities.
Very true also, forgot about that.
You could almost say that both these characters being oppositely effected by the DPR rule and both being easily T1 nearly counteracts themselves 😉
On the topic Chippy discussed of the DPR, instead of comparing the numbers at five above, what if it worked this way:
Set both MP’s to five above.
Find their Power Level on the PAT.
If one MP is at least 2 brackets higher, the MP in the lower bracket may start at full.
Example!
Majin Buu, Evil Buu has a five above zero power level of 4 million. This is in bracket E.
Gohan level 1 from Majin Buu Saga has a five above power level of 1,125,000 and this is bracket C.
Since bracket E is two brackets above C, then Gohan would start at full and would get to go first. Buu would start at five stages above zero still.
This is actually what I originally thought as well, a ‘2-bracket rule’.
It makes more sense since it’s all that matters anyway. Except for “If you’re weaker/stronger…” effects.
Though I didn’t push it because I thought that there might be too limited personalities with level 1 MPs in the D and E bracket which would make the rule very narrow and nearly redundant.
I’ve heard 800 Score war stories, there might be a perfect explanation, I’m just pointing out what I (and most) saw as an issue with the game. I don’t want to get started on Bleach in Didier’s article thread lol.
Another issue with DPR in Retro would be virtual Raditz. Raditz + Saiyan TS = bad news if someone were to start at two above.
And above all those tiers: Dende Tier.
WGS Majin Vegeta + Anything = Bye bye ally decks, Nuff Said
Personally I would X MP Blue MBS would be amazing if there wasn’t so many effective ways to shut the mastery off and empty discard to ruin the day.
In the time I tested Blue Majin Vegeta, games I didn’t get my mastery shut off, or didn’t pack a lot of discard removal, went extremely well in my favour, but Saiyan was pretty much a death sentence, as well as Buu with his discard removal.
If you’re really that worried about Buu or Broly having massive stages, Play Black Popo or King Kai and have a little fun
By “+ Anything”, you mean “+ Opponent not having any physical or omni block”, right? Because I’m pretty sure an Ally deck will always hold a block for your power. Only way that really has any chance of working is in Black CS, where you can hope to randomly nuke said block.
Cool article. I’d argue that there isn’t a clear Tier 1 in DBZ due to the large amount of sets, multiple victory conditions, and fast pace of play (placing luck at a higher factor than other games).
But I love graphs. So yay!
Meh, like I said in the article DBM, League probably has more possible combinations than DBZ in terms of what can be done or listed on a tier list and they have not one, but several websites who’s sole purpose are to theorycraft them. And luck is no different than a game having some RNG behind the scenes or something. DBZ is very fast paced, but you are still building your deck around this fast pace of play.
One thing I did want to get some perspective on, kind of my main point and overall feeling about these lists, does anyone feel the same about the toxic nature of them? I’ve found that players just won’t ever try anything new even for a second; especially if someone on the internet tells them what to do.
It was always a huge struggle for me and ultimately caused me to just stop playing League, despite its roaring popularity and huge money pools. There’s no point in play a game where 10% of every match was spent justifying my choices and the aftermath was a disjoint and upset team.
The sad thing? I’ve even had relationships dissolve over me not wanting to play what was T1.
I find nothing wrong with keeping track of what’s in each “tier”. It’s essential in my opinion to know this information whether you plan on playing a tier 1 deck or play against a tier 1 deck. It also helps to discuss them as it can then be possible to find out the balance of the game. Is this Tier 1 because it’s solid and balanced and performs well against different situations, or is it Tier 1 because it is over powered and broken?
An example of this would be Tapkar, as printed in WGS. He was Tier 1 because he was TOO good. At the time, his PUR was insane, he didn’t just get card advantage but he got card QUALITY. He could pick and choose the best things for his hand so he never had a bad one.
Broly Saiyan and Buu beats are Tier 1 now because they are good against a wide variety of deck types. Like Broly for example offer: hand advantage, fast level jump, good card powers, great anti-ally, anti-drill, non-combat removal and even Mastery hate. I could go on but most every here already knows all this. But I wouldn’t say that’s quit the same as the level of Tapkar was in his prime.
I think that will depend on the game itself quite a bit — some games that are more ‘truly’ fun will remain fun, especially if that Tier List is diverse enough. Other gamers will say “screw you, tier list!” and do everything in their power to invent ways to compete against it, even if they ultimately lose (basically my tournament strategy throughout DBZ). Also, who’s to say someone won’t accept the challenge of trying to win with a deck someone has slated in tier 2 or 3?
Ultimately, the community decides whether the list is toxic or not based on its popularity. Also I’d like to point out, it is no coincidence that games with large cash prizes are negatively affected by the emergence of a ‘tier’. VS was the same way, even Yu-Gi-Oh! Countless people would play the prior event’s winning deck simply because they felt it was the best way to win gobs of money.
DBZ has never been a rich game (although it was a rich man’s game…..more on that later) in terms of prizes — hence the development of a fairly diverse ‘tier list’ and tournament scene.
100% with you on DBZ being a rich man’s game. My very first regional at WW Philly I managed to claw my way into Top 32 with my Goku Freestyle, but was ultimately ripped a new one as my deck had:
No FA, No Vic Drill, No Huh???, No Releasing, No Dev Drills, No Champion Drill, 2/4 Relentless Spirit, 0/4 Power Strike, 0/4 Face Break, No SSJ3.
Also, hilarious, the other week I stumbled across my second appearance to WW Philly’s pre-tourney report on some random website:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/CaliberEntertainment/ar/t787.htm
Ah…the banter of a 16 year-old. Completely forgot I wrote that.
Preaching to the choir, bro. LOL All the event’s I top cut after Cell Games was with a Dragon’s Victory deck that had NO URS, FA and the only promo it had was like one copy of Piccolo’s Fist Block :/. Goku’s Ready as poor man’s FA FTMFW.
And my TE deck (Blue Cell Jr. Ally) went 4-0 at World’s 03 with no URS or FA and was using jank like They’re All There instead of ZWG. lol failboat.
Getting back on topic HA!
Yea, now that you say that DBM I think money plays a HUGE factor in the toxic nature of a tier list. Most of my negative experiences come from League, which had a juicy 10 million dollar prize pool last year.
Sad really, especially when I think about how it changed dynamics of my group. And ultimately it was all trash because there was a shot in hell we could qualify without investing the level of time the pros do into that game.
I think part of the problem with DBZ was that for every one good personality that was made, there were ten more that were complete garbage and 5 more that were just Meh. And I’ve talked about this on the facebook group, but what happened in this game was:
Bunch of mediocre MPs are made.
One Amazing MP is made.
Amazing MP dominates.
Amazing MP is nerfed to be nearly unplayable.
More crappy MPs are made.
Time for another Amazing MP.
Repeat.
So basically you have a bunch of deer and then you throw a wolf pack into the mix. Then you shoot the wolves going “problem solved” only to shortly thereafter throw a tiger into it. It because unbalanced and the tiers are so decisive because there is a limited amount of truly amazing characters to play. Now imagine if PTT, Roshi, Tapkar, and A18 along with SWK all existed at the same time, as printed, with Buu, Broly, Bojack etc? There would be many more check and balances and Tier 1 would be much wider I think. Obviously this is hard to playtest to prove as no one wants to even think about the Four Horsemen and their Queen (SWK) being out there again.
It would, however, also mean that the gap between Tier 1 and Tier 2 was exponentially wider. When tier 1 is smaller, and full of only “powerful” decks rather than “overpowered” decks, it becomes easier for lower decks to find ways to effectively combat them. Even if the quality of tier 1 was the same, and it was merely quantity, there’d be less things that lower tiers had to tech against, thus allowing it to actually still be relatively viable.
I know that Retro has a list of WHO won various events in the games history, but I wish it included regionals and actually had WHAT type of deck they played. If my memory recalls me, there were a number of events where the decks that were the ultimate winner weren’t Tier 1 at all.
The tier list is toxic in my opinion. I’m one of those “scrubs” out there putting together creative decks that lose a lot. However, I would like to think that for every ten garbage ideas I have, I come up with one that could actually be pretty successful in a tournament setting. I think this article is getting a ton of attention as an opportunity to scrutinize what does and does not make tier one. Unfortunately, I think that is the opposite of what the author had in mind. At best, a general tier list is useful in knowing what you’ll likely be up against. At least in a larger setting like gencon, I know I’ll at least be playing against six different players. I just hope/wish that six different players=six different decks.
No way! If that makes you a scrub, than I’ve been a scrub all my life and TLC would need to seriously reevaluate some things.
It was kind of taken in a direction I didn’t intend, but any discussion is good discussion as far as I’m concerned.
Facing 4 or 5 of the same deck was something I was not looking forward to going into last year’s GenCon, but I was surprised to see much diversity. It may have been a lot of the same style, but the MPs and victory methods decks used varied greatly.
I hope this trend continues, especially as retro releases new virtual cards as they have been. I guess that was my intent of the article; to promote that.
How can a tier list be toxic when it’s just the truth? There is always a clear representation of what is the best overall and what’s not. If one doesn’t like it, that’s their perrogative but you can’t pretend like they aren’t useful because they are.
That’s just it, it’s not the truth. By definition it’s an opinion and opinions always have a bias.
And there isn’t always a clear representation of what’s the best. These games change over time. The Ezreal example? That champion had a ~45% win rate stateside while having a ~60% win rate in China. Explanation? Chinese magic?
It’s because tier lists are toxic overall and when something is seen on the internet, it is taken as truth rather than being cross referenced or found out for yourself.
Not useful? “The last thing I want to do is have you finish this article thinking tier lists are useless.”
I do not think that a Tier list is toxic unless you are one of those players that wants to play with X, regardless of how good/bad it is. In any game system where you have to pick X tokens from an X*2 or greater token set, there will ALWAYS be tiers (just like there will always be “vanilla”). You just can’t stop it due to how the selection process works.
Furthermore, except to those where the magical Tier list makes their Favorite token “not high level”, TIer lists are very helpful, many points of which are covered in the article. But I think the best reason is that it helps newer/underskilled players more than people realize. If you are really new to the game, how are you to know how good a deck/collection is? You could play amongst your gaming group, but really you’ll only know how good it is to a comparison level of those you are playing. But with Tier Lists, you could actually see “Oh, a lot of people see this as high level, but this other stuff not. Hmmm….” It helps reinforce to the newer player where that power curve is at.
Good discussion.
Chippy
I wouldn’t call someone disregarding a tier list and playing whatever they want toxic. That’s only one person and him/her playing token in tier 4 over and over will have zero effect on the environment as a whole.
I hate to keep going back to League, but again it’s where most of my negative experience lies. Riot Games had to completely overhaul their punishment system (Tribunal, Honor) not once, but three times in order to deal with the MASSIVE negativity that plagued their environment. All because if you stepped one inch outside what was considered ‘meta game’ you were put on a stake. This is where these lists are toxic; when players treat them as a bible and forget the given truths and definitions about them listed above.
I think you misunderstood. I did not say the player was toxic. I was just saying that a Tier list is toxic to that type of player. 😉
Chippy
Ah, my bad. Yea I misunderstood you.
THAT’S A BINGO!
Chippy hit everything right on the head.
Awesome article! Well written!
Fact remains that Score released set after set of crappy mp’s and when they finally released good one’s, they required errata (A18, Tapkar, Roshi, etc..). Not because players abused them, but because Score did not playtest the cards enough and did not put enough into R&D. Time, resources or simple marketing terms may have prevented Score from doing more at the time. If you look back the saiyan and frieza saga sets, they are perfect examples. If they had put any actual forward thinking though they would have not wasted money printing cards like this too shall pass in the first place.
The thing with CCG’s is that by nature, to some extent of course, they give players the freedom of building the environment as new cards get released and as players become more versed in the game, etc. It’s not like games likes Dominion, Fluxx or Innovation where there are no more changes to be made in the future and this is all there is (minus expansions there are few to no rule changes). What I am getting at is, CCG’s require a lot of past and forward thinking where as other games are set, and typically balanced from the getgo. It’s all irrelevant and in retrospect anyways but I wanted to mention that we can’t discount the fact that this game was unbalanced from the very start.
Heck, it was more then that. Up here where I live, we were so behind the league that when the kid buu saga was actually released in the US we were still playing with CGS rules and had yet to see the wgs/bs and buu saga’s (minus those ppl who were able to buy them in the states).. And when the person who organized the tournaments up here said we were going to play with kbs instead of cgs format, a lot of people quit. Too much change at once.
Coming back to the article… I have 12-13 decks and they are organized by tier. When I play my friend I always tell him to pick 2 decks in the same tier. Not because the other decks pose a lesser threat but because the playing field is usually more even. If you can build a Chiaotzu deck that can take on SWK, Broly, Goku, Gohan, etc..by all means, superb! For my own sake, where I lack the creativity that others may have, to me, finding a tier list was a noob solution, and an effective one if I may add. Now that I’ve played the game more, it is certainly much funner to use cards that aren’t always used and to break out of what I consider my comfort zone.
I hear you on the decks organized by tier thing. This for me was much more prevalent in Expanded where, up to the end of the game, SWK Black had been my favorite deck. However I found myself just not playing it at all, not even once, for the last six or so months of the game just because it was no longer fun to play or play against. Despite what anyone says, fun is the main fuel for a player, be it fun by competition/winning or fun from the game itself and playing with friends.
Focused Z I’m not finding myself able to do that as easily. Decks seem to rock, paper, scissor more and just when I think I have a deck that stands tall, Krillin Freestyle beats it down 😛