A URC members thoughts on the Metaknight Ban

[Tesh]

Even though Marth is like at least +2 with every character that would want to use those stages?

 

[Cassio]

Tesh I dont think youre understanding that people hate the stage, not the characters on the stage. People are going to continue picking gay characters and playing gay because they are gay stages and its the most effective way to play.

 

[Player-1]

I HIGHLY doubt we will be seeing GaW Vs Kirby every RC match we watch.

 

[Cygnet]

I think Tesh is right, that the problem is the combination of MK and RC/Brinstar and not just the stages, because most of the commotion and the switching and the problems are due to the hybrid, excepting ICs, but ICs are affected so heavily by every stage except neutrals, and it would be ridiculous to ban all CPs for ICs.

That said, other stages are banned because of "degenerative play," which is highly subjective and probably becomes a mess when it's controversial and blurry like in this case; maybe a vote should be held? (Admittedly, it's not random, although to say it doesn't have hazards may not be altogether correct - its hazards might not be the usual kind because they don't hurt you, they just kill you outright.)

If, then, the problem lies in the combination of MK and RC/Brinstar, shouldn't RC/Brinstar (or maybe just one) be removed before MK, in order of less drastic to more in terms of changing the metagame? (Similar to how small rules chipped away at MK's planking and stuff like that before the big ban hit.) Unless, of course, the problem extends beyond the combination and to all stages, which would then warrant MK's ban.

Not saying that none exist (I'm sure plenty exist), but what reasons are there, independent of stage, that warrant his ban? Of course, this is the entire Ban platform, and I apologize for not knowing the Ban platform well, but what are the most notable ones?

EDIT: Didn't see any post since Masky's..... lolol.

EDIT 2: Marth is +2 on characters that would use those stages when on a neutral; the numbers probably change on RC, although I have no idea how much.

 

[Cassio]

If it were rainbow cruise alone maybe. But theres two stages where it benefits to have a secondary that abuses them to the max, and not risk losing your stage ban. Banning MK doesnt change this system at all.

If I play Marth and can ban frigate and still play a character that can gay people on brinstar/RC its a powerful dynamic that exists with or without MK.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

I HIGHLY doubt we will be seeing GaW Vs Kirby every RC match we watch.

Why not?

Doesn't the Brawl community stress having strong secondary characters (aside from MK) for hard matchups or bad stages?

I'm not trying to be a smart alec or anything for a change.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Tesh]

Eh, Assuming I knew how to play all legal characters, if I CPed RC and my opponent said "im going GW, Kirby, Pit, etc." I would just pick Marth...

So maybe the metagame will just devolve into Marth on CPs instead of MK?

 

[Player-1]

I think Tesh is right, that the problem is the combination of MK and RC/Brinstar and not just the stages, because most of the commotion and the switching and the problems are due to the hybrid, excepting ICs, but ICs are affected so heavily by every stage except neutrals, and it would be ridiculous to ban all CPs for ICs.

I actually disagree, ICs aren't affected THAT heavily by non neutrals except maybe brinstar. Rainbow affects them a bit as well (more than any other CP stage), but not THAT badly either.

That said, other stages are banned because of "degenerative play," which is highly subjective and probably becomes a mess when it's controversial and blurry like in this case; maybe a vote should be held? (Admittedly, it's not random, although to say it doesn't have hazards may not be altogether correct - its hazards might not be the usual kind because they don't hurt you, they just kill you outright.)

It does meat a blurry line where some stages are on the fence like Japes, Norfair, etc.

Nothing on RC kills you, except MAYBE something like the doughnut blocks, those are the only thing I can consider possibly 'hazardous'.

If, then, the problem lies in the combination of MK and RC/Brinstar, shouldn't RC/Brinstar (or maybe just one) be removed before MK, in order of less drastic to more in terms of changing the metagame? (Similar to how small rules chipped away at MK's planking and stuff like that before the big ban hit.) Unless, of course, the problem extends beyond the combination and to all stages, which would then warrant MK's ban.

The problem is not the stages alone for MK being banned and does extend past the combination of stages.

Not saying that none exist (I'm sure plenty exist), but what reasons are there, independent of stage, that warrant his ban? Of course, this is the entire Ban platform, and I apologize for not knowing the Ban platform well, but what are the most notable ones?

I'm not saying I agree with all of these things I'm about to state for the arguments for his ban, I'm just stating them:

-MK being too broken overall (this ties in with stages and other things i'm about to say)
-MK breaking the CP system (not having any bad stages or bad MUs)
-MK being too overcentralized (too many people use MK which stales the metagame and hurts competitiveness)
-The majority of the community wants him banned
-We've seen how the metagame is with MK legal for the past 3.5 years, it's time to try it without him banned and see how it works.
-It makes the game more exciting
-More character diversity.

 

[Player-1]

Why not?

Doesn't the Brawl community stress having strong secondary characters (aside from MK) for hard matchups or bad stages?

I'm not trying to be a smart alec or anything for a change.

Smooth Criminal

Because all of those other characters still have bad MUs (even on RC) and are harder to pick up than MK is.


edit: 7000th post :3

 

[Cassio]

Because all of those other characters still have bad MUs (even on RC)

It doesnt count when those bad MUs are against other characters that are also gay on those stages, lol. Honestly though Im not sure youd find much agreement here.

Edit: rather than make a new post Ill just add it here, I think there would be more evens than what existed with MK.

 

[Player-1]

Snake and GaW I think Snake still beats GaW on RC. I'm not completely sure about this myself, but Esam told me that MVD beat Vinnie on this stage.

edit: and we're talking about character diversity on a stage. Whether it's Wario Vs Kirby, Pit Vs GaW, ROB Vs Dedede, or any combination of them. It's still a lot of character diversity.

 

[Tommy_G]

-MK being too broken overall (this ties in with stages and other things i'm about to say)
-MK breaking the CP system (not having any bad stages or bad MUs)
-MK being too overcentralized (too many people use MK which stales the metagame and hurts competitiveness)
-The majority of the community wants him banned
-We've seen how the metagame is with MK legal for the past 3.5 years, it's time to try it without him banned and see how it works.
-It makes the game more exciting
-More character diversity.

1: Opinionated. MK is beatable and has been beaten numerous times over the course of Brawl's release.
2: The only thing I can't logically disprove, however I do believe that the majority of top and high tiers do well enough to not need a secondary for MK more than they simply need more match-up experience and game experience.
3: Disproven by MikeHaze's video he isn't too overcentralized. 5 Falcos at FL's last big tournament out of 45 entrants shows 11% of the players are Falco mains(Dr3w, Viper, Xaltis, DJ Jack, and myself.) Should Falco be banned in Florida for having the same ratio as MK does simply because "too many people play him?"
4: Shouldn't matter for a ban. It's extremely biased and very poor criteria for a ban. People will just find the next "cheap" thing to ban.
5: You've got to be kidding me.
6: Opinionated. I like watching MK so MK not banned is more exciting to me. (See how this can be turned for opinion.)
7: Removing the most popular of something will force people to choose other characters. Banning D3 would allow for more viability of the characters that lose to his chain-grab, thus create more character diversity.

I'm just trying to understand Brawl player's ban logic...and I just want Jungle Japes back.

 

[Player-1]

1: Opinionated. MK is beatable and has been beaten numerous times over the course of Brawl's release.
2: The only thing I can't logically disprove, however I do believe that the majority of top and high tiers do well enough to not need a secondary for MK more than they simply need more match-up experience and game experience.
3: Disproven by MikeHaze's video he isn't too overcentralized. 5 Falcos at FL's last big tournament out of 45 entrants shows 11% of the players are Falco mains(Dr3w, Viper, Xaltis, DJ Jack, and myself.) Should Falco be banned in Florida for having the same ratio as MK does simply because "too many people play him?"
4: Shouldn't matter for a ban. It's extremely biased and very poor criteria for a ban. People will just find the next "cheap" thing to ban.
5: You've got to be kidding me.
6: Opinionated. I like watching MK so MK not banned is more exciting to me. (See how this can be turned for opinion.)
7: Removing the most popular of something will force people to choose other characters. Banning D3 would allow for more viability of the characters that lose to his chain-grab, thus create more character diversity.

I'm just trying to understand Brawl player's ban logic...and I just want Jungle Japes back.

alright, since i'm about to defend all of these points, I just want to note that I don't agree with all of them and that I just think that your points were expressed poorly, I was just posting that to show what the most popular arguments were. Also, a lot of people believe that a lot of these points alone don't warrant a character ban, but when added up they do (which you didn't disprove).

1. Beatable characters can still be broken.
2. 3.5 years of MU and game experience isn't enough?
3. MikeHaze didn't disprove anything in his video. It just said that 11% (which is wrong, actually 20%) use MK and that's not overcentralization when I think it is. 20% is a lot when there are 36 other characters in the game and the next most used character is under 10% (unless there was a miscalculation with that too). Not to mention at higher levels of play which is what we care to examine the most has even more MK dominance. Looking at the top 100 in Rajam's chart 31% of the players have MK listed in their C1 column (you could call that their main) and this is without looking at anyone else who uses MK.
4. Actually it does matter when you're trying to protect and enhance competitiveness in a game. You can't have a competition if there's no one to compete and a bunch of people quit (or never even entered the community) just because of MK
5. Nope.
6. True, this is opinionated, but when the majority of the community thinks so as well then it starts to matter (goes back to point 4) since we get more things like sponsors and more players, etc = more competition.
7. This is also true, but the banning of MK leads to a MUCH more enormous amount of character diversity than if we banned D3.

 

[Cygnet]

Nothing on RC kills you, except MAYBE something like the doughnut blocks, those are the only thing I can consider possibly 'hazardous'.

Maybe I phrased it poorly, but I meant how characters can be easily gimped at the pendulum or the falling blocks, although that's usually not much of a problem. Also, the end of the loop where you have to drop back down onto the ship kinda kills you, but really isn't too much of a problem.

The entire stage is sorta a hazard, in that maneuvering is difficult and, if you're on the bottom while the screen is going up or on the left while the screen is going right, your approach is forced (more predictably than usual). During the part after the boat disappears and the screen rises, aerial characters gain a massive advantage on ground-based characters, because there's not really any ground and if they can get underneath, it's easy to set up juggling or platform sharking from underneath.

In addition to that, around the pendulum, players can be easily gimped due to the pendulum's motion and lack of edges, as well as hitting someone against the falling blocks, although these things aren't that troublesome. Mostly, it's the extreme advantage conferred onto aerial characters that makes this stage a polarizing one. Characters that control the air and also have good recoveries can control the stage and be in almost a constantly advantageous state; MK especially exaggerates this, which is probably the cause of the infamous MK CP to RC.

EDIT: Err..... plus your recovery, if it's bad, becomes really predictable sometimes and you get punished a lot harder for stuff like that.

(Although it's really..... just subjective in the end, anyways.)

-MK being too broken overall (this ties in with stages and other things i'm about to say)
-MK breaking the CP system (not having any bad stages or bad MUs)
-MK being too overcentralized (too many people use MK which stales the metagame and hurts competitiveness)
-The majority of the community wants him banned
-We've seen how the metagame is with MK legal for the past 3.5 years, it's time to try it without him banned and see how it works.
-It makes the game more exciting
-More character diversity.

Being broken and having no bad MUs seems kinda subjective, so I guess MK's fate pivots on those, although most everyone believes that he is broken and has no bad MUs. MUs themselves are controversial, so I'm not sure if MUs can be a solid point in favor of MK's ban, being so debated themselves. (Same with stages, I guess..... although he doesn't really have bad stages, it's just combinations like Falco/ICs and FD or something, maybe he gets camped more on larger stages?)

A trial period without MK might be nice, but it might be hard to go back after some time and it would take a very long time to see how everything pans out at the end. (You could say that even after ~4 years, we haven't seen the full, full metagame of with-MK gameplay! Although we have seen a lot of it.....)

Excitement doesn't seem like a ban-worthy criteria, maybe because sets with MK can still be exciting (if you don't immediately close the Youtube window or walk away from the setup), just like sets without MK can still be boring. In fact, seeing a lower character beat MK can be more exciting than having a mid tier beat a high tier or anything like that, so it might spread out hype, but each hype set might not be as hype as it could have been.

Character diversity is definitely awesome, but it shouldn't really be forced onto MK mains because having to learn a whole new character is a lot of trouble and is very difficult. It's great for those of us who don't main MK, though.

The majority of the community wants him banned, but if the community always got what they wanted, then the URC need not exist; polls could be held for everything. The URC should be independent of the community and not make decisions because the community wants it, although the reasons that the community wants it can definitely be valid reasons. In the end, the real reasoning should be whatever reasoning the community uses and not the fact that a majority voted for it.

EDIT: Gah, didn't see Player-1's post above.

 

[mikeHAZE]

Even though Marth is like at least +2 with every character that would want to use those stages?

Yeah, those stages take away any advantage Marth would have versus those characters and IMO even pushes it as a disadvantage for Marth in specific matchups.

 

[Ghostbone]

If it were rainbow cruise alone maybe. But theres two stages where it benefits to have a secondary that abuses them to the max, and not risk losing your stage ban. Banning MK doesnt change this system at all.

If I play Marth and can ban frigate and still play a character that can gay people on brinstar/RC its a powerful dynamic that exists with or without MK.

That's why two stage bans are amazing....

 

[The calm tyrant...]

LOOOL this thread!

All i know is besides every match-up chart or whatever kind of chart that's been used, I've never ended a tourney full of energy. In the end, i have to put in WORK to beat whoever i have to beat regardless of if "mk has no bad match-ups" or not. It's sad how much other players are under minded because of statistics that aren't even 100% accurate >.>. Melee led a damn good example of how smash should be played competitively by the amount of time and determination they put in to overcome whatever obstacles they had as a community, so why shouldn't we follow their example when we're obviously a joke of a community for SOME reason?

But carry on, and keep the endless cycle of the same argument continuing!

Shoutouts to player1 as well, hopefully i can meet you someday!

 

[Vinnie]

Snake and GaW I think Snake still beats GaW on RC. I'm not completely sure about this myself, but Esam told me that MVD beat Vinnie on this stage.

The only time MVD and I have played in tournament, Game 3 was RC and I won.

 

[Flayl]

-MK being too broken overall (this ties in with stages and other things i'm about to say)
-MK breaking the CP system (not having any bad stages or bad MUs)
-MK being too overcentralized (too many people use MK which stales the metagame and hurts competitiveness)
-The majority of the community wants him banned
-We've seen how the metagame is with MK legal for the past 3.5 years, it's time to try it without him banned and see how it works.
-It makes the game more exciting
-More character diversity.

Good grief, this is terrible. If I didn't come to my own conclusion for the MK ban I'd be embarrassed to be on the pro-ban side.

edit: It's really the last 4 points that do it for me. I have smaller issues with the first 3.

 

[Player-1]

Shoutouts to player1 as well, hopefully i can meet you someday!

Yo come to GA bro, we're fresh ^.^

The only time MVD and I have played in tournament, Game 3 was RC and I won.

My bad then, that's just what I was told.

edit: btw vinnie, MM best of 5 at Apex, RC only, Diddy Vs GaW

 

[Vinnie]

I'll do Diddy vs Wario on RC, not GW though. That MU is just dumb.

 

[Player-1]

Lolz, alright. Idk the GaW MU very well so I'd prefer this =p

 

[Ripple]

I laughed so hard at tyrants post.

"I have never left a tournament full of energy so therefor mk isn't bannable"

Stoped reading after that garbage

Oh and I suggest everyone go to the peach boards and check out the money match thread. It......is......amazing

 

[The calm tyrant...]

What are you even quoting, Ripple? LOL. I was mentioning the amount of effort i have to put in to win tournaments, REGARDLESS of what character i have to fight because i'm also fighting my opponents mind as well, not only his character. Jesus Christ bro, learn to read between the lines. Not once did i even mention anything about banning mk >.<... Another reason i can't stand posting back here is that someone is always skewing your posts, when they don't even understand the post to begin with.

 

[Player-1]

Another reason i can't stand posting back here is that someone is always skewing your posts, when they don't even understand the post to begin with.

one of my biggest pet peeves, it's very frustrating.

 

[Tommy_G]

It's ok Tyrant. The good players, aka anti-ban, are too busy winning tournaments to post. That's why the boards are full of complaining, nonplacing kids who are "allowed" to flail around because they host tournaments.

Cater to the scrubby, "option A is sooo cheapppp" masses. That's always good for the competitive scene.

Ill respond to the other post when I get home, but it's kinda hard when all they say is no, no, no, no without anything else.

 

[Player-1]

It's ok Tyrant. The good players, aka anti-ban, are too busy winning tournaments to post. That's why the boards are full of complaining, nonplacing kids who are "allowed" to flail around because they host tournaments.

Cater to the scrubby, "option A is sooo cheapppp" masses. That's always good for the competitive scene.

Ill respond to the other post when I get home, but it's kinda hard when all they say is no, no, no, no without anything else.

hope you know there are more "good" players that are for the ban than against it.

 

[Tommy_G]

Let's pretend you were a top player and didn't main MK. Even if you didn't think MK was bannable, why wouldn't you agree with it. You're playing to win and if tbe most popular character gets banned, then that's more people that have to get good again with a character they don't usually play with, not because it's not MK.

It's so disgusting really.

Now I know I'm not a top player, hell I haven't entered tournaments in a while even though I've been to them. I main Falco so the MK ban would do nothing but benefit me personally, but I know he's not good enough be banned for that simple reason. His character make-up is good, but managable.

 

[Gnes]

Let's pretend you were a top player and didn't main MK. Even if you didn't think MK was bannable, why wouldn't you agree with it. You're playing to win and if tbe most popular character gets banned, then that's more people that have to get good again with a character they don't usually play with, not because it's not MK.

It's so disgusting really.

Now I know I'm not a top player, hell I haven't entered tournaments in a while even though I've been to them. I main Falco so the MK ban would do nothing but benefit me personally, but I know he's not good enough be banned for that simple reason. His character make-up is good, but managable.

Uh, please don't attempt to make blanket statements about non-mk top players. My region isn't dominated by mk, yet all three of our top players are pro-ban.

 

[Ripple]

falco mains should be against the ban because that'll actually hurt their character

 

[SaveMeJebus]

No it wouldn't.

 

[Ripple]

who has one of the best match ups against MK? falco

who loses horridly to ICs and pika? falco

who beats Ics considerably (thanks to CP) and pika just by being better? MK

your turn

 

[Tommy_G]

Uh, please don't attempt to make blanket statements about non-mk top players. My region isn't dominated by mk, yet all three of our top players are pro-ban.

It's either that or all of you guys have terrible ideas on what the proper criteria for a ban is. I'd rather like to think you were competent intellectuals though.

falco mains should be against the ban because that'll actually hurt their character

How do you figure?

Less MK means more Marth who is one of Pika's biggest counters. http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=254597
Less MK means more Snake who is one of ICs biggest counters. http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=242786

Falco does decently well vs both of those characters.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

who has one of the best match ups against MK? falco

who loses horridly to ICs and pika? falco

who beats Ics considerably (thanks to CP) and pika just by being better? MK

your turn

Who does really well against MK (even on CP stages)? Pikachu

Who has one of the best MUs in the game against MK on starter stages? ICs

Nothing is stopping players from using these characters in the current metagame. You also can't argue that players don't use these characters because of MK's dominance because the usage of these characters was never really high, even when MK didn't really dominate

These characters do well in a metagame with MK in it and they aren't going to do any better in a metagame without him

 

[Cassio]

who has one of the best match ups against MK? falco

who loses horridly to ICs and pika? falco

who beats Ics considerably (thanks to CP) and pika just by being better? MK

your turn

yeah...youre just wrong here.

Uh, please don't attempt to make blanket statements about non-mk top players. My region isn't dominated by mk, yet all three of our top players are pro-ban.

To be fair many of these players still have fairly selfish reasons according to their own testimony, even if it isnt anything as sinister as Tommy_G said.

 

[Ghostbone]

Less MK means more Marth who is one of Pika's biggest counters. http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=254597
Less MK means more Snake who is one of ICs biggest counters. http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=242786

Falco does decently well vs both of those characters.

Marth isn't going to get much better without MK.
Snake doesn't counter IC.
/really? Linking to a match-up thread from 2009? So relevant....

 

[Supreme Dirt]

who beats Ics considerably (thanks to CP) and pika just by being better? MK

Pikachu does not lose to Metaknight.

 

[Tommy_G]

Marth isn't going to get much better without MK.
Snake doesn't counter IC.
/really? Linking to a match-up thread from 2009? So relevant....

How about disproving me with actual information or notible player testimonial and a factual basis instead of just calling me wrong. Maybe your posts will actually be worth creating a rebuttal, but as of right now, all I see is 5 year old screaming "NO NO NO."

It's not worth calling out how wrong you are if you can respect me enough to put out some kind of evidence to back up your claim.

 

[Charlesz]

Lol @ murderball vs globetrotter reference. This video is too legit.

 

[Tesh]

Let's pretend you were a top player and didn't main MK. Even if you didn't think MK was bannable, why wouldn't you agree with it. You're playing to win and if tbe most popular character gets banned, then that's more people that have to get good again with a character they don't usually play with, not because it's not MK.

It's so disgusting really.

Now I know I'm not a top player, hell I haven't entered tournaments in a while even though I've been to them. I main Falco so the MK ban would do nothing but benefit me personally, but I know he's not good enough be banned for that simple reason. His character make-up is good, but managable.

I don't get this logic. You say pro ban is selfish and even the top players just want MK banned to make things easier on themselves? The same could be said about anti-ban, even the ones who don't main MK. For example, I know Mekos is anti-ban. Maybe he just wants to make sure Marth isn't prevalent enough to ruin his chances of winning? You really as just speculating on people's motives without looking at your own.

Anyone could ignorantly just make up a logical reason that the other side is being selfish.

For ****'s sake, you can't argue selfishness as 24% of the community trying to overpower 76%.