I really have no clue what you’re trying to argue for, largely because you never actually state your opinion. Like if you’re saying that we should be considering the opinion of everyone who plays the game, then obviously Raynor is the worst. As per the stats page that you gave, his win rate is dead last, and it’s also well known that most of the community finds him to be bad. It’s only a handful of top players who say that Raynor is actually a good character when played incredibly well, but you’re arguing against basing our opinion of character power on the opinions of a few people.
My opinion is that your list is biased… hard to miss…
Your line of thinking is flawed. Of course how well x, y, z performed must be measured not only to the average player. It also has to be measured for it’s too performance.
Your logic is nothing but your own (fairly poor performance). Whereas the resources I provided demonstrate both average and top performance.
When was the last time you heard someone say how well a car performs based on random joe’s daily work route? Anyway, responding you is a moot exercise. Continue to be biased, your skill will only impact you and your unfortunate partner 
I’m not sure how the evidence you provided really counteracts my opinion about Raynor. I think we can agree that based on your stats, Raynor’s average performance is the worst (as he has the lowest winrate). Based on the speedrun metric, he is 7th best, which is near the middle.
I think it might also be worth, say, considering TeamLiquid’s Raynor guide, where they state that he is one of the worst characters to use for Mutators (though admittedly, this guide predates the addition of the prestige system). I would be willing to accept better data on mutation performance if you have it.
Based on this, I think you could reasonably put Raynor fairly low on the list, even if you’re personally good at playing him.
And yet you seem to want to ignore the hardest difficulty that can be randomly queued into with a random player which makes no sense either.
Like I said, both you and Capitaine here are the same flock. Arrogantly believing your own limited experience and skill to be the golden standard.
I don’t need to prove Raynor is best (nor have I suggested he was at all in any previous posts). I’ve simply pointed out that Raynor perform average, similarly to Kerrigan and Mengsk. And that the data provided show your list is biased.
Nothing I say here will change the opinion of those who feel they are the best without a shred of evidence. Your skill is your own, I can only pray for those partnered up with people like yourselves.
Yeah, I don’t have any significant disagreements with any of what you’ve posted. Even where your tierlist differed from what I wrote I think what you posted makes sense. Of course, my opinions about the game are not completely ironclad. I’ve played some commanders more than others, and particularly given how many options there are now with the prestige system it’s completely possible that I may have overlooked some prestiges that are very strong.
I also don’t know where you’re getting the idea that I think I’m the best at the game. I’ve played co-op commanders for like a thousand hours over 6+ years, which I think is enough to state my opinion about the tierlist, but certainly there is nothing definitive about my opinion, which is why I encourage other people to post their own thoughts. However, it’s much more worthwhile to contribute in a constructive way, say, by sharing your own thoughts on the tierlist, rather than trying to suggest others should not post because they don’t meet arbitrary skill metrics or what not. That type of toxic posting is how you wind up with a dead forum.
It’s probably worth noting that pretty much everyone said “you don’t agree with me so you must be bad” EXCEPT for me. So really, I’m not the one you should be accusing of thinking they’re the best and that no one else’s opinion matters.
1 Like
It is Fears go to strategy. Hopefully he will grow up one day.
1 Like
I don’t mind discussing the game with anybody, but this kind of thing definitely discourages people from posting. I sort of knew this response was coming when I posted that I think Raynor is the worst because according to most there’s only two types of people in the world, people who think Raynor is great and people who are bad at the game. I just think that maybe there’s a reason that the other commanders seem to be able to get the same value for drastically lesser effort.
People like yourselves take the notion that “you may not be as good as you think” as personal insult. Take that to heart as others minimizing your opinion as a result of it.
The truth is that you are exactly that - mediocre (not good and not bad). Only that you (and yourself alone) inflating the value of your own opinion.
It isn’t a go to strategy to say someone is not good when facts point to their poor understanding. I do admit, Tero comes off as far more humble than Capitaine ever was and will be.
To give you an idea Tero. I have played since coop started, 10k+ games. It is really still nothing. In the face of the 200k from sc2coop, the speedrun records, and thousands of gameplays on YouTube, my experience is nothing but mine. And it’s a drop in the bucket at that lol.
So I find it hard to see eye to eye with the likes of those who believe their fraction of a corner of experience can bare weight to the whole of the community.
Of course, nobody said your list was to be THE standard. It’s just that with that whole context in mind, it is strange for those individuals to disregard everyone else’s equally valid experience and opinions of COs (re: tier list), but call out on others.
Want to prove everyone wrong? Want to prove yourself right? Provide some replay. Perhaps we are missing the greatness that is Capitaine or Tero. Won’t know or learn until we see masters in action though, don’t you think?
That is in no way what happened, though. Your post was basically “this post is long but I disagree with one part of it so therefore you’re bad and your opinion doesn’t matter”. That is never going to be a form of constructive feedback in any situation. As a general rule, if you’re responding to a lengthy post with a single line you’re probably not being constructive.
No one can know everything. Even the very top players usually only have significant experience with one or a handful of characters. If we set the standard to be able to make a tierlist as you having to have omniscient knowledge of the game, it would be impossible.
Instead, the more sensible way to go about it would be to have a lot of people who are reasonably knowledgeable post their opinions, and we can then compare them to see where they differ and where they are the same. For example, across pretty much all posts in the topic, Abathur rates high. So we can probably say with relative confidence that Abathur is one of the best. For characters who vary more, we just have to argue it out until we arrive at something that looks like a consensus, and some characters might always be controversial.
1 Like
Honestly, this whole this is silly; both sides have merit, and both sides are off base.
Raynor really is pretty poor at many mutators, since his units have relatively low hp and generally rely on numbers and high attack rates. But the ones he’s okay at, you can trivialize with the Brannigan routine or mines pretty easily.
But to think he needs crazy amounts of practice to do well is also wrong. All you really need is a solid grasp on what makes him good, and a pretty small amount of practice to figure out a decent mule routine. It won’t put you at the top of his skill ceiling, but it makes him easily competitive with the other COs.
1 Like
Oh yeah, you’re the one that’s off base Mr. Rumble!
Well Mr. Rumble this is where you and me disagrees. I spent crazy amounts of time practicing Braynor and still I am not that good! When I started on Braynor, I spent about 4-5 months straight playing Braynor only (I did not play another CO during that time). Building CCs, muling, hotkeying, finding the best build order, what units to use for what comp, transitioning from early to midgame then to late game. I am still practicing today! It has become more like science to me.
And till today, I still can’t solo most mutations with it! 
I have a lot more to learn! It’s sad Mr. Tero keep missing this point.
1 Like
Well, part of the issue is that no one in this game is super bad. It’s obviously not the case that “Raynor is so bad that he can’t even clear Brutal”. Every character can clear Brutal easily when played even moderately well, the only time character strength matters is when doing mutations and brutal+, and even then every character certainly can win every Mutation.
This is why I posed the question “if Raynor isn’t the worst, who is?”. Someone has to be the worst. To me, Raynor feels like the obvious choice, due to his inconsistency with certain mutators and the fact that it generally feels like you have to work pretty hard when playing him to do things that other commanders can do pretty easily. But certainly, I wouldn’t mind seeing other people’s opinions on who should be at the bottom (or on the total ordering of characters, it’s not only the question of “who’s the worst” that has merit, but that seemed to be what people were most interested in talking about).
Does someone have to be the worst? Or are the COs outside of the top 3-4 balanced enough that it simply comes down to player skill? (edit: player skill in that particular CO) To me, that’s the crux of the argument here, and why neither side will accept what the other says.
Granted, that’s just my opinion, naturally.
I mean this from a purely logical standpoint, any list that attempts to order the characters will have to put someone at the bottom.
You can argue that this entire exercise has little value, and maybe that’s true, but it does seem to be something that people are interested in talking about.
That’s fair, but as someone who was an outsider to the argument until I forcibly inserted myself, the thing got pretty heated for just something to discuss (not calling anyone in particular out, mind)
Wow Mr. Rumble just straight up ignored me 
Well this tier list should be based on player’s skill level. On how much they are able to get out of their COs.
That certainly wasn’t my original intention. I mostly just think this subject is interesting. I have no issue with anyone saying “you’re wrong about this point because such and such”, as clearly I don’t know everything, but it can be a little annoying when most of the responses are just “I disagree with you so therefore you suck”. Still, maybe some of my posts were more inflammatory than they should have been.
To be fair then, there will never be a consensus with that, personally I would do dreadfully with Kerri or H&H compared to me using Raynor or Fenix on a difficult mutator. So my list would reflect that.
But that’d have a Kerri main call exception, or at least it always seems to. (not with Kerri, but any CO, I should say)
Honestly, solo brutal + is a heck of a level to put yourself on to say you’re no good with someone. Personally, if it wasn’t hard then I’d argue they’re way over tuned. (which is very much present in coop for some COs, yup)
Can the “such and such” be that “your skills aren’t quite there, thus your list is biased and inaccurate to general data”? I mean if you present yourself to be so “logical” and “unbiased”, surely you can see the difference between “you suck therefore invalid” vs “your suckiness leads to biased listing”???
At the moment and so far, it sounds to me that you are making a cake, wants to eat it, and expects everyone to say your cake is great. When people tell you your cake isn’t all that good cuz it isn’t… you are just turning it into “everyone blaming you as a victim”… kinda weird