Each character is backed with data provided by a top character specialist. Tiers are calculated based on multiples of the standard deviation of character rank.
It’s crude and kinda ugly, but the data is solid. I’ll be working on it more in the coming days.
Note: I did not contribute any match-up charts in order to stay completely impartial.
I love this idea. KEEP IT COMING MR. B.
I still don’t put much faith in tier lists, even if you had the developers themselves providing the data. 
Yup, just ask Sleep and his C-Tier Gargos lol
Gonna have to question that Raam losing to Tusk. No way that’s how that works. Raam can completely shut down everything Tusk can try in that match up. Also gonna have to question C tier Jago?? You’re telling me Kan-ra is better than Jago?
This is pretty cool, especially with the specific matchups.
One major issue with this, though, is that there’s a lot of contradictions in the data (as there’s bound to be with opinions from 25 people). Just looking at it quickly, 4 of Aganos’ winning matchups (Cinder, Glacius, Sabrewulf, TJ) are listed as winning matchups for the other character on their respective list.
It’s still a cool thing to put together, nonetheless.
True enough, plus the match-up data of a few highly skilled players hardly makes a “community” list. When collecting data its kind of important to have some control in your test subjects, if each character’s data is pulled from a different player it really doesn’t give you an accurate estimate of those matchups overall because player skill and preferences will skew the results of those matchups. Now if you had ONE very skilled player who knows the entire roster like a developer or a tester play 100 matches with each character and recorded the data it might be a little more accurate.
So you just had the top players of each respective character give their stance? Then use a confidence test to see how they rank? I guess that’s fair seeing as how they can use the metas top potential already.
I’m not sure what “calculated based on multiples of the standard deviation of character rank” even means, but gosh darn it, I want to see this so-called “solid” data! Get Zerg Killer and all the other contributors in here! They provided the data, I wanna see it! 
Data don’t account for no players! Data… Pfff. 
…geek…RELAX.
Right. Remember that each character’s MU chart is provided by a different person. The confidence level at the bottom of the panel addresses your concern. It calculates the % of match-ups that are in agreement between all the provided data.
You can see the data by clicking on the character portraits. Hover over the portraits on the info panel. It’ll show you the detailed MU info.
Data and opinions don’t correlate. This is nothing more than statistics and law of averages! “Guidelines” at best. There is nothing concrete here. For example, my Aganos can confidently beat most Omens, Tusks, Thunders, and ARIAs, but this chart will tell you otherwise.
I clicked it and nothing happened. All it did was show me the theoretical matchups - that’s not raw data.
I will admit, I do like the chart confidence, though - most are really low, which basically means that they are not reliable. LOL! 
I meeeaaan…sleep is a top player. Any top guy can make a character look great.
Exactly! And this “data” doesn’t account for that. Nothing can unless you want to start making KI player cards, similar to baseball cards, or something…
You’re being pedantic dude. You’re complaining about stuff that is clearly obvious. Please don’t derail the thread. 
Welcome to what a tier list is.
No. What this data tells us is how THE COMMUNITY thinks the tier list goes. The data is based on opinions, yes, but it’s still data. Data is always drawn from opinions. Surveys (like the one we recently did about a potential after this game) was used to estimate what ppl want. This is data based on how players think match ups go. I don’t get why you are so quick to discredit something that was never said to be concrete.
Question. what outlier made fulgore the only S tier character?