So for a while I’ve just organized the Tier Lists by how they feel, and that will still be true to a certain extent, but I was just relaxing, thinking about Tier Lists (as I am wont to do), and I noticed a pattern in how I think about them. So I decided to write it down and share it with you guys <3
Tier 1: These mechs are the best at what they do, and what they do fits the meta.
Tier 2: These mechs are either good at what they do, and what they do fits the meta, or they are the best at what they do, but what they do does not fit the meta.
Tier 3: These mechs are either decent at what they do, and what they do fits the meta, or they are good at what they do, but what they do does not fit the meta.
Tier 4: These mechs are either bad at what they do, but what they do fits the meta, or they are decent at what they do, but what they do does not fit the meta.
Tier 5: These mechs are bad at what they do, and what they do does not fit the meta.
These aren’t going to be hard and fast rules, and I’m not really going to change anything, but now that I know what was going on in my head, I can use it to make my Tier Lists more structured and rigid and fun! Cuz what says fun like structure and rigidity. Which was supposed to be sarcastic but…hehehe. Anyways, it also explains some stuff, like why Tier 1 is empty on the IS Tier Lists under the Medium and Heavy categories.
I just thought this was interesting (though mostly to me) and wanted to share. Sooo yeah. Have a great night!
-G