Hope
Inkling Cadet
- Joined
- May 9, 2015
- Messages
- 296
- NNID
- Agrexis
Exactly; however I fail to see where my "elitist overtones are," especially when I specifically defended lower ranked players earlier in the thread. You are assuming a lot about me, all of which is wrong. Obviously nothing beats anything 100% of the time, so using that argument to refute a tier list made it seem like you didn't know what you were talking about.There is no hard tournament data yet. Therefore everything is just being based on opinion.
The key factor of a "tier list" assumes equal skill of each player along with the general POTENTIAL of success of the weapon for the masses and also how many people are using it. I am simply pointing out the flawed logic and elitist undertones of how people are trying to push this "tier discussion" as the gospel truth of bad weapon vs. good weapon and good player vs. bad player, when this is just all based on "potential" and popularity anyway. As I've said earlier if we are just taking effort vs. payout I agree with the list, but at the end of the day the list is irrelevant and you guys are getting WAYYY too hyped defending it. Calm down.
I'm not saying tier lists aren't useful but a "high tier" weapon with a low skill user will not out preform "low tier" and a highly skilled user. At the end of the day none of it really matters as like I said skills trump a tier list anyway. You can continue being salty with your high tier weapon when a low tier weapon user wipes you out.
My point was that player skill level does not change a tier list because it assumes equal skill. Which I think you agree with, but you can't see past me being am "elitis snob" so idk.