Feelings on MK and the MK ban after Apex

[Strong Badam]

he overslept and didn't show up to his r2 pools is what i heard at the venue

 

[Kuro~]

Ya he was dq'd round 2...

Because of the above.

 

[Exdeath]

There was a 35 LGL in place.

What does that have to do with Meta Knight's planking?

 

[Thino]

And, to reiterate my question, does planking classify as a stalling technique or not?

 

[Omni]

Planking is just as much as a stall as a character letting go of the ledge and regrabbing it.

 

[Orion*]

he overslept and didn't show up to his r2 pools is what i heard at the venue

i swear i remember him telling me he just wanted to focus on teams and didnt feel like he was playing that well. kadaj did some similar garbage lmao

 

[Strong Badam]

Orion where's that GIMR quote from? LMAO

 

[Orion*]

Orion where's that GIMR quote from? LMAO

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=13444023&postcount=1345

this post and the one bizkit said below it will forever make me salty. GIMR for being completely clueless about other regions, and having an attitude over it to boot. But he did apologize after seeing me sig this LMAO so I guess I can give him 2 cents back.

I can't really get mad at bizkit because I sandbagged out of the tournament, but to a certain degree it's gay because the week before that I 6-0ed him in grandfinals and he got 13th. So for him to say i was incapable of making top 20 is kinda obnoxious

/yes I know i'm a public salt monster

 

[Merkuri]

After watching Mew2king time so many people out I don't blame people for banning MK. I think a rule should be made where MK can't win by timeouts period since he is simply too good at it. This would mean that if any game times out then it's an automatic victory for MK's opponent. And yes this is not fair to MK mains but it would just be the price they have to pay for playing by far and wide the best character in the game.

 

[Exdeath]

After watching Mew2king time so many people out I don't blame people for banning MK. I think a rule should be made where MK can't win by timeouts period since he is simply too good at it. This would mean that if any game times out then it's an automatic victory for MK's opponent. And yes this is not fair to MK mains but it would just be the price they have to pay for playing by far and wide the best character in the game.

I get a lot of irrational hate at the mention of that rule haha.

 

[Big Moose]

Honestly, just banning *** CP's would help with our MK issue. But I guess we just suck.

 

[Thino]

After watching Mew2king time so many people out I don't blame people for banning MK. I think a rule should be made where MK can't win by timeouts period since he is simply too good at it. This would mean that if any game times out then it's an automatic victory for MK's opponent. And yes this is not fair to MK mains but it would just be the price they have to pay for playing by far and wide the best character in the game.

But winning by time should be considered a legit tactic

 

[Strong Badam]

After watching Mew2king time so many people out I don't blame people for banning MK. I think a rule should be made where MK can't win by timeouts period since he is simply too good at it. This would mean that if any game times out then it's an automatic victory for MK's opponent. And yes this is not fair to MK mains but it would just be the price they have to pay for playing by far and wide the best character in the game.

are you mentally ********

 

[Akaku94]

Honestly, just banning *** CP's would help with our MK issue. But I guess we just suck.

Are you more mentally ********?

 

[Strong Badam]

removing dumb stages isn't a bad idea
I don't, however, think "It'll make MK less OP" is a very good reason for it; a stagelist should not be attempting to balance the game in any way. I do agree that MK would probably be a worse character if the stagelist weren't so ****ing stupid. Still #1 obviously but yeah.

 

[Big Moose]

Are you more mentally ********?

Said the Kirby main.

No, what I said makes perfect sense and many agree.

 

[Strong Badam]

Just put up a poll and have a lot of people vote on it. Regardless of whether it's justified or not, if you have a majority opinion it's okay!

 

[Akaku94]

Said the Kirby main.

No, what I said makes perfect sense and many agree.

Hey, I look much sexier eating people than you do

But the underlying issue is that even if getting rid of a load of stages would make MK slightly less broken, it's better to ban one character (that overcentralizes the entire metagame) than a bunch of stages that have nothing wrong with them.

 

[Strong Badam]

Banning stages to make a character less bannable is an admirable goal. You'd also be hard pressed to get a majority of people to agree that Brinstar/RC have nothing wrong with them. In fact there are only two stages in this game that really have nothing wrong with them, but a stagelist of ~6-7 would probably be a lot easier to attain for this community and would be relatively acceptable.

 

[Akaku94]

Which 2 stages would you say have nothing wrong with them? Heck, what justification do you have to ban every stage except 6-7?

 

[Kink-Link5]

I'd say the only justification needed is that only about 6 or 7 stages aren't really ****ing stupid.

 

[Hylian]

Hey, I look much sexier eating people than you do

But the underlying issue is that even if getting rid of a load of stages would make MK slightly less broken, it's better to ban one character (that overcentralizes the entire metagame) than a bunch of stages that have nothing wrong with them.

I keep thinking you are my girlfriend lmao it's so trippy. Same avatar.

 

[Strong Badam]

Which 2 stages would you say have nothing wrong with them? Heck, what justification do you have to ban every stage except 6-7?

What justification do you have to make any stage legal? About as much as I do to say Brawl tourneys should played on pencil and paper, D&D style. Any kind of criteria you want to use is arbitrarily contrived as are mine. My ideology on a stagelist should be to have the least amount of inconsistent impact on results as possible; yours are probably somewhere along the lines of "If it isn't broken then it should be legal" which is one that is slowly dying out in our community as MLG has had less and less influence on our rulesets.

Two stages with no inconsistent impact on the game are BF and FD obviously.

 

[Big Moose]

Hey, I look much sexier eating people than you do

But the underlying issue is that even if getting rid of a load of stages would make MK slightly less broken, it's better to ban one character (that overcentralizes the entire metagame) than a bunch of stages that have nothing wrong with them.

I'm saying Brinstar and RC are the ones that really give MK a noticeable upper hand. But just playing on neutrals would be fine and would probably help with our MK problem. Look at Japan.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I just typed something long as **** three times and my internet went out all three times while typing it. I'm going to be editing this post a lot.

BF
FD
SV
YI
PS1
PS2
HB

Is an extremely flexible, yet manageably small, stage list that doesn't favour MK in a strong fashion.

MK vs ICs

MK bans FD, ICs ban Halberd. MK can still have a soft CP with PS1 to avoid IC's more easily and work with the platforms. Ic's can still soft CP to SV since it obviously has the second easiest chain grabs.

Diddy vs Snake

Snake bans FD because of bananas, etc. Diddy bans, let's say SV because this snake in particular is known to abuse the platform, or something like that. Snake can still CP to BF and work with those close platforms, and Diddy can still CP to PS1 for banana locks, or CP against Snake on like, YI or HB to a lesser extent.

Wario vs Marth

Wario bans BF because of Marth's love of the platforms, Marth bans uh **** I don't know what stages Wario likes. I think I recall Wario going to YI a bit though, so I'll guess that one. Marth can still work with FD for grab releases, and Wario can still MAN **** WARIO I DON'T KNOW **** ABOUT THIS CHARACTER.


Or the stage bans could differ between players depending on their opponent's known strong stages and their own weak ones, etc.

 

[Akaku94]

I keep thinking you are my girlfriend lmao it's so trippy. Same avatar.

lol

What justification do you have to make any stage legal? About as much as I do to say Brawl tourneys should played on pencil and paper, D&D style. Any kind of criteria you want to use is arbitrarily contrived as are mine. My ideology on a stagelist should be to have the least amount of inconsistent impact on results as possible; yours are probably somewhere along the lines of "If it isn't broken then it should be legal" which is one that is slowly dying out in our community as MLG has had less and less influence on our rulesets.

Two stages with no inconsistent impact on the game are BF and FD obviously.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=317506

What are you basing "impact on the game" on? What's your starting point for what an unimpacted game is? You're saying that those two stages don't change gameplay. If a stage doesn't change gameplay, then no character should want to cp it. FD is one of the most polarizing stages in the game! If you played with only those two stages, ICs would get to play on their best stages no matter what. You complain that RC and Brinstar are bad because they make MK better, but you have no problem with FD?

I'm saying Brinstar and RC are the ones that really give MK a noticeable upper hand. But just playing on neutrals would be fine and would probably help with our MK problem. Look at Japan.

MK has the upper hand on every stage in every matchup; Otherwise he wouldn't be broken. You want an example of stages that give a noticeable upper hand? Look at Diddy getting his best stages as starters.

I just typed something long as **** three times and my internet went out all three times while typing it. I'm going to be editing this post a lot.

BF
FD
SV
YI
PS1
PS2
HB

Is an extremely flexible, yet manageably small, stage list that doesn't favour MK in a strong fashion.

First of all, thank you for actually giving a list and explaining it instead of just whining about how broken other stages are or how FD da bess.

Anyway, the main error you made here is the error of omission. You only have 7 stages, and you're ignoring several stages that have absolutely nothing wrong with them. Frigate, Delfino, even RC don't have anything wrong with them, yet you didn't put them in, probably because

small, stage list that doesn't favour MK

What you're missing is that it's not the job of the stagelist to nerf and buff characters. Yet that's exactly what it's doing! Our "starter list" has artificially buffed ICs, Falco, and the like (notice how almost the entire top tier sans MK is grounded.), because they get to play on good stages, and then we ban anything slightly controversial because it's "cheap" or it "changes gameplay."

 

[Kink-Link5]

Frigate has plenty wrong with it. Non-grabbable right edge that effects everyone, random flips, Randall's cousins the two twins off the top of my head.

Delfino has water camping, sharking every few seconds, and is generally easy to play really stupidly for any match up.

RC is banned in Melee too. It has nothing to do with MK, it has to do with the stage being bad and interfering with the match.

Yes, I'm aware of shyguys, Johnny, smashville platform's random starting position, etc. Those do not have nearly close to a massive impact on the game.


As for favouring MK with a stage list, I still keep PS1 as a soft CP and HB as a slightly stronger one. A better wording for the sentence would have been "Doesn't favour MK in particular" since it has some stages for anyone.

At the very least, I'd say it's worth testing out.

 

[Omni]

Akaku94, I understand what you're saying.

However, I think the biggest reason for a huge demand in a smaller stagelist is to focus on direct character vs. character interaction which should inherently force players to gain a higher level of mastery of their characters as opposed to spreading their character usage too thin by using specific characters to counterpick certain stages.

That run-on sentence.

You are right that it artificially buffs Falco and IC's, but that's not the point. It so happens that the best characters in the game are the ones that are the current best on our stagelist. Removing Brinstar/RC/Frigate isn't an attempt to buff Falco/IC's, but rather to remove the significantly huge stage presence that removes the character vs. character interaction gameplay which should be the main focus. At the same time, removing these stages significantly decreases MK's effectiveness.

Killing two birds with one stone without severely changing our metagame. Me bueno.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

You are right that it artificially buffs Falco and IC's

No. It just removes the artificial buffs that other characters have.

 

[Omni]

Well, by artificial, I mean removing certain stages can indirectly buff/nerf other characters.

 

[Steam]

And then suddenly falco, diddy, ics become total *** matchups for tons of characters and mk is still full ******. Yaaaay. The stage list is already artificially buffing ground based characters... And that's not enough? X_X

And if you think character v character should be the main focus, you're playing the wrong game. This is smash, not street fighter. Stage interaction is fine as long as it's reasonably consistent, has no centralizing strategies, and is as non random as possible.

 

[M@v]

Two stages with no inconsistent impact on the game are BF and FD obviously.

<______________________________<

So polarizing many matchups, especially some top tier ones in particular, is no inconsistent impact?

(bf I agree btw)

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I didn't actually mean to contradict your statement, Omni but more the general consensus that "fixing" rules is just there to "arbitrarily accomodate MK", when it's actually the current ruleset that uses a lot of arbitrary rules that make MK so powerful in the first place ... so when people argue to change rules we're not "making rules to make MK tolerable" ... we ask for arbitrary rules that make MK "intolerable" to be removed.

Edit @ Mav: No it's not. The impact might be drastic but it's consistent.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Also, if a small legal stage list is good for the top characters, it just means those characters are good >_>

We shouldn't have to have a full-on remedial stage list just so crappy characters have a fair shot. Brawl is unbalanced, I thought this was known since 2008.

 

[M@v]

The impact might be drastic but it's consistent.

I feel delivers even less of an impact than FD though. I'd put FD 3rd behind bf at 1 and sv at 2

 

[Omni]

I didn't actually mean to contradict your statement, Omni but more the general consensus that "fixing" rules is just there to "arbitrarily accomodate MK", when it's actually the current ruleset that uses a lot of arbitrary rules that make MK so powerful in the first place ... so when people argue to change rules we're not "making rules to make MK tolerable" ... we ask for arbitrary rules that make MK "intolerable" to be removed.

Edit @ Mav: No it's not. The impact might be drastic but it's consistent.

Ah, I see. Agreed.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Every stage has some impact on every match up. The point is that a lot of stages on the current legal list are stupid in general. Unfortunately, this isn't Melee where the stage list can be as high as 6 and have all very good stages. Instead, there has to be a line drawn and tested out to use a manageable, small stage list.

 

[John12346]

Also, if a small legal stage list is good for the top characters, it just means those characters are good >_>

If a large legal stage list with stages that haven't even been proven broken for some 3 years are decent for some characters, then... uh... idk lol

But we're not trying to artificially buff characters in our rulesets. From my understanding, the idea is to simply determine which stages are and are not suitable for competitive play(for example, stages that cause little interference, have no polarizing or degenerate strategies, etc.). Characters shouldn't really be playing a role in getting a stage banned or legalized, for sure.

And from there, when we determine which stages truly encompass the skills that we want to test, then, and only then, can we talk about which characters are good.

 

[Akaku94]

Ok, let's play FD only, because it doesn't interfere with pure pvp. ICs are now the best characters in the game.

 

[fkacyan]

Regardless of the ruleset used, it is going to make some characters better than others. This is unavoidable.

Seeing as we still know jack **** about MUs on a stage-to-stage basis, I think talking about "polarization" of a stage is pretty pointless and generally uninformed.

To be quite fair, though, while we have a lot of stages the actual differences between most of them are extremely small.

@Above: ICs are already the best character to bring into a double blind anyways on any starter