atomzed wrote: Cool! Will you be getting opinions about people's rationale for voting? It will be cool to have a compilation of different people's opinions. Maybe invite certain 'celebrity' forummites to give their inputs? Or certain people who has unique choices?
locked wrote: Pjoe0211 wrote: and i think that invisible women has to be the hardest to rank, those of us with 2 star rosters have never even seen her in action at all I am fully transitioned and I still never see her in action: no one runs her and even if someone does, she doesn't do anything... On offense maybe?
Pjoe0211 wrote: and i think that invisible women has to be the hardest to rank, those of us with 2 star rosters have never even seen her in action at all
mischiefmaker wrote: atomzed wrote: Cool! Will you be getting opinions about people's rationale for voting? It will be cool to have a compilation of different people's opinions. Maybe invite certain 'celebrity' forummites to give their inputs? Or certain people who has unique choices? I would love to have other people's opinions! I meant to include a place on the survey where people could write about their rankings, but forgot, so if anyone has opinions they'd like to share, please feel free to PM me and I will try to get them into the writeup. That being said, last time I invited a bunch of well-known forumites to contribute; only half of them took the survey at all and only one contributed to the writeup (<3 Celerity).
locked wrote: Who are other C-listers, Yelena and Falcon?
Ben Grimm wrote: locked wrote: Who are other C-listers, Yelena and Falcon? Yelena and Ragnarok. Falcon's a solid B-lister, especially now that he's been in a movie.
locked wrote: wyp, 'C-lister' was referring to the Marvel canon, I am pretty sure I never heard of Falcon before CA: TWS. MPQ Falcon is solid, no argument about that... He must be one of the most annoying characters on defense.
mischiefmaker wrote: The problem with putting characters in tiers is twofold. One, it isn't very interesting, because most of us have a pretty good idea of what the tiers look like, so such a ranking doesn't provide us with any new information. Two, if you put characters in tiers and then rank them, that's exactly as much work as just ranking them, unless I put them in tiers for you. And if I do that, then we don't get interesting results like the guy who ranked a 1* character #1.
Phantron wrote: Well for me it's hard to say rank two characters who are very close like say, Captain America versus Black Panther. Which character being better also depends on what you're doing at the time. Due to PvP's unique concern about being attacked, there are a lot of characters that are otherwise very good that aren't so good due to fear of being attacked, and I'm not sure if you're supposed to think about that when ranking a character. Falcon is a very good character, for example, but he's probably not someone you want to use very often on PvP due to his lack of HPs.
GT-47LM wrote: It would cut down on the amount of time wasted selecting which character should be at what specific number. With doing tiers first, it'll narrow down the broad number of characters and let you instead focus on ranking only 5 or so characters at a time instead of all at once, which also gives you an idea of where the line is when it comes to character strength and not just thinking that #9 is a lot better than #14, even though they are both B-tier.