This!
Why should you have to play a matchup where you have to win twice as many situations than your opponent, this being with a character who has a good matchup verse mk.
Proban - if good mks
good mks in australia lolol no ban
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Australian Meta Knight Legality
- Thread starter Shaya
- Start date
- Status
Why should you have to play a matchup where you have to win twice as many situations than your opponent, this being with a character who has a good matchup verse mk.
Proban - if good mks
good mks in australia lolol no ban
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Lololol I don't play brawl - Probably shouldn't have gotten into a discussion about the metagame...
I'll just stick to my original point...you can't compare MK to Melee Fox or 64 Pika
I'll just stick to my original point...you can't compare MK to Melee Fox or 64 Pika
Grim Tuesday
Smash Legend
Wrote a massive post about this awhile ago but never posted it:
Essentially, every confrontation or conflict in every fighting game in existence is a game of rock-paper-scissors. Both players have different options (different attacks, blocking, dodging, etc...) and those options counter other options.
There are obviously quite a few differences between fighting games and rock-paper-scissors, though. There are a few reasons for that:
• All of the "throws" are weighted. In other words, different options have different advantages and disadvantages. This is analogous to if you were playing a Best of 3 set of RPS games, where winning with "Scissors" caused you to automatically win the entire Bo3 set.
• There are MANY of these situations that occur during a single game, thousands, even, instead of a low amount like in an RPS set.
• There are a vastly larger number of options than the traditional rock, paper and scissors. Every action that a character can perform is an option that is a part of the RPS scenario.
On a seemingly unrelated topic, many moves in fighting games are considered to be "safe", even when they whiff and your opponent is within your "zone". The easiest way to explain how safe a move is is via the 'Multiple RPS' concept.
If an action protects the player in some way while it is being performed (with a decently sized hit-box, invincibility, etc...), has very short ending lag and the character performing it has an attack with comes out quickly, the first move can create a 'Double RPS' situation. What I mean by this is that the opponent will, in most cases, be unable to punish the first move due to the aforementioned traits, which allows the first player to perform a second move that the opponent will ALSO have to play RPS with before being able to punish the first player.
To provide a Brawl example, think of Meta Knight spacing and camping with his Down Air. For most characters, punishing the dair will require either a hard read, a well placed hitbox or a power-shield. If a player cannot pull off one of those options and attempts to punish normally, they will have to prepare for another Dair, Shuttle Loop, Ftilt, Dtilt or Uair (if they come from above). This means that they have to play RPS twice, once to avoid the dair while still getting in Meta Knight's zone and then a second time to avoid his follow-up.
The majority of characters can pull this off, even many low tiers (spacing in this fashion via bair is a large part of Jigglypuff's gameplay, for example). The only character who cannot pull a 'double RPS' off in viable situations is Ganondorf due to his very slow, punishable attacks.
It's worth noting that the number of RPS situations an action can produce is not static and depends on how close the opponent is and the match-up. For example, a character like Falco can create LOTS of simultaneous RPS situations on Final Destination by firing SHDL at a Ganondorf on the opposite side of the stage.
Which brings me to my final point, one of the main reasons with Meta Knight is so good is that he can create these 'double RPS' situations FAR more frequently than any other character with his Ftilt, Dtilt, Uair, Dair, Grab, Shuttle Loop, Fsmash and Dsmash. His Ftilt and Shuttle Loop can lead to large numbers of RPS games, which can make them ridiculously difficult to punish for many characters.
This is such a powerful trait of Meta Knight that the characters who are said to only lose -1 (slight disadvantage) against Meta Knight mainly do so well because they are good enough at punishing to keep MK's RPS creation ability down to the level of a standard character. Diddy Kong's bananas, Fox's speed, Falco's laser frame traps and DACUS, Marth's Dolphin Slash, etc...
Understanding this RPS element of Meta Knight's game is key to seeing exactly what it is that makes him so safe, and determining how that affects the metagame as a whole.
There are obviously quite a few differences between fighting games and rock-paper-scissors, though. There are a few reasons for that:
• All of the "throws" are weighted. In other words, different options have different advantages and disadvantages. This is analogous to if you were playing a Best of 3 set of RPS games, where winning with "Scissors" caused you to automatically win the entire Bo3 set.
• There are MANY of these situations that occur during a single game, thousands, even, instead of a low amount like in an RPS set.
• There are a vastly larger number of options than the traditional rock, paper and scissors. Every action that a character can perform is an option that is a part of the RPS scenario.
On a seemingly unrelated topic, many moves in fighting games are considered to be "safe", even when they whiff and your opponent is within your "zone". The easiest way to explain how safe a move is is via the 'Multiple RPS' concept.
If an action protects the player in some way while it is being performed (with a decently sized hit-box, invincibility, etc...), has very short ending lag and the character performing it has an attack with comes out quickly, the first move can create a 'Double RPS' situation. What I mean by this is that the opponent will, in most cases, be unable to punish the first move due to the aforementioned traits, which allows the first player to perform a second move that the opponent will ALSO have to play RPS with before being able to punish the first player.
To provide a Brawl example, think of Meta Knight spacing and camping with his Down Air. For most characters, punishing the dair will require either a hard read, a well placed hitbox or a power-shield. If a player cannot pull off one of those options and attempts to punish normally, they will have to prepare for another Dair, Shuttle Loop, Ftilt, Dtilt or Uair (if they come from above). This means that they have to play RPS twice, once to avoid the dair while still getting in Meta Knight's zone and then a second time to avoid his follow-up.
The majority of characters can pull this off, even many low tiers (spacing in this fashion via bair is a large part of Jigglypuff's gameplay, for example). The only character who cannot pull a 'double RPS' off in viable situations is Ganondorf due to his very slow, punishable attacks.
It's worth noting that the number of RPS situations an action can produce is not static and depends on how close the opponent is and the match-up. For example, a character like Falco can create LOTS of simultaneous RPS situations on Final Destination by firing SHDL at a Ganondorf on the opposite side of the stage.
Which brings me to my final point, one of the main reasons with Meta Knight is so good is that he can create these 'double RPS' situations FAR more frequently than any other character with his Ftilt, Dtilt, Uair, Dair, Grab, Shuttle Loop, Fsmash and Dsmash. His Ftilt and Shuttle Loop can lead to large numbers of RPS games, which can make them ridiculously difficult to punish for many characters.
This is such a powerful trait of Meta Knight that the characters who are said to only lose -1 (slight disadvantage) against Meta Knight mainly do so well because they are good enough at punishing to keep MK's RPS creation ability down to the level of a standard character. Diddy Kong's bananas, Fox's speed, Falco's laser frame traps and DACUS, Marth's Dolphin Slash, etc...
Understanding this RPS element of Meta Knight's game is key to seeing exactly what it is that makes him so safe, and determining how that affects the metagame as a whole.
Remastered
Smash Lord
What do I get if I win?
I just can't stand it when people whine and complain about MK when they use characters who are amazing and fair icredibly well against him.
Making a generalisation about eating a stocks worth of percent everytime out of one grab as an example is not a wise point to make when your character runs close to even with the god bat if you play well.
Woe is me the Snake main.
And wait, I don't think I'm losing at all if this is a contest. Let's make it a contest
Grim Tuesday
Smash Legend
The Snake vs. MK match-up is only going to get worse and worse for Snake as time goes on.
Remastered
Smash Lord
Not now that MK is banned Grim :/. Forever close to even.
Grim Tuesday
Smash Legend
I guess that's true.
Leisha
Top Tier Pillow
Actually billy, rob would be alot more viable if metaknight was gone. I dont really have a problem with other matchups. He just gets rendered as a bad character because metaknight exists.
Well, I hope to see him go anyway... Would give the game a bit more diversity for once lol.
Well, I hope to see him go anyway... Would give the game a bit more diversity for once lol.
Grim Tuesday
Smash Legend
ROB would definitely be more viable.
All the other characters above him, bar King Dedede with a LGL, are actually winnable now.
The only notable character who is improved by the MK ban is Toon Link, though.
All the other characters above him, bar King Dedede with a LGL, are actually winnable now.
The only notable character who is improved by the MK ban is Toon Link, though.
Remastered
Smash Lord
With MK gone, the LGL will most likely be removed which I disagree with but anyway.
Once these 2 major changes are made, you will see a cosiderable jump for campy characters on the tier. Pit will go higher substantially.
The game will get campier to an extent, and I wonder how this will effect the metagame and the want for people to play brawl.
Once these 2 major changes are made, you will see a cosiderable jump for campy characters on the tier. Pit will go higher substantially.
The game will get campier to an extent, and I wonder how this will effect the metagame and the want for people to play brawl.
Are we actually giving proofs that MK is the best character in the game?
Do people actually disagree with that?
MK is the best character in the game. Every game has one. Meta Knight has produced a lot of problems though. The players who were in the top echelon over a year ago+ all seem to dislike MK. But now the players who haven't actually experienced every one and their mother being able to (and willing to) use MK in bracket (even if those players didn't win tournaments, they still beat countless non-top echelon players consistently) don't seem to see him as a problem.
Understandably, he's not a major problem in Australia right now. But I can say with almost guarantee that he would be if our players
1. really wanted to increase their chances of winning
2. if the money available for consistently winning was as much as regions in the US.
Right now, if you use MK here, you may win, but you aren't really going to be making a bucket load of cash - we just don't have the scene size (I wonder how many people would eventually pick up MK if Nova continues to sponsor every single tournament?). Our players genuinely enjoy the characters they currently use. Because we don't have the frustration of a plethora of people using MK nor is it that much more worthwhile to use MK than your current main (the incentive to drop your main is minimal - no cash, and everyone will hate on you for using MK), we have people who don't really see MK as a problem for this social standard the Australian scene has, they're ignorant to it because they haven't experienced it / don't understand it.
Do people actually disagree with that?
MK is the best character in the game. Every game has one. Meta Knight has produced a lot of problems though. The players who were in the top echelon over a year ago+ all seem to dislike MK. But now the players who haven't actually experienced every one and their mother being able to (and willing to) use MK in bracket (even if those players didn't win tournaments, they still beat countless non-top echelon players consistently) don't seem to see him as a problem.
Understandably, he's not a major problem in Australia right now. But I can say with almost guarantee that he would be if our players
1. really wanted to increase their chances of winning
2. if the money available for consistently winning was as much as regions in the US.
Right now, if you use MK here, you may win, but you aren't really going to be making a bucket load of cash - we just don't have the scene size (I wonder how many people would eventually pick up MK if Nova continues to sponsor every single tournament?). Our players genuinely enjoy the characters they currently use. Because we don't have the frustration of a plethora of people using MK nor is it that much more worthwhile to use MK than your current main (the incentive to drop your main is minimal - no cash, and everyone will hate on you for using MK), we have people who don't really see MK as a problem for this social standard the Australian scene has, they're ignorant to it because they haven't experienced it / don't understand it.
SethT
Smash Ace
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2010
- Messages
- 627
I remember picking up MK because he looked cool
Realistically, I'll do better with MK gone. Olimar wins a game, gayed to Rainbow ride or Brinstar with a pocket MK. I'm bad though so /shrugs. Wouldn't surprise me to see Jaice do a lot better now.
that being said, more Marth mains. sighhhhhhhh.
Realistically, I'll do better with MK gone. Olimar wins a game, gayed to Rainbow ride or Brinstar with a pocket MK. I'm bad though so /shrugs. Wouldn't surprise me to see Jaice do a lot better now.
that being said, more Marth mains. sighhhhhhhh.
Silfa
Smash Ace
all good, lol. ACT is pretty bad. It would be okay, but luke brings the standard down considerably...I was trolling, in response to Luke's trolling. We cool? I'm sure ACT is good at Smash and no hard feelings were meant.
(luke is bad)
**Havok**
Smash Lord
Those were all my mistakes, why did I not pivot into higher ground? Why did I cypher going forward? And a Fair at the end? Execution on that initial Ftilt = terrible. Mistakes. They can all be avoided.
And how about you watch this one instead:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyuO9j1ZTi4&feature=related
and this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H0mBtrqxBQ&feature=related
And nah, the MU is actually closer than you think, you just have to keep up when they try to rush in and stay calm when they dair camp. Landing is a huuuuuge part of that MU, %80 of Snakes don't know how to land. DMG doesn't matter, if you can stay alive all you need is him to be at 115% and one uptilt.
xXArrowXx
Smash Champion
i love metaknight hes my favourite sonic character.. why wont you let me play him :<
Remastered
Smash Lord
Shaya..... what? Everyone agrees that MK is the best so I don't understand where that came from. We understand how good he is and so does everyone else in the competitive community. There is no need to call people ignorant because quite frankly, you couldn't be more wrong. The only people who don't understand how good MK is, are those who are new to the scene, and those who haven't played the game enough to understand how he can abuse his tools.
Tbh Shaya, it sounds more like a vandetta to have him banned for your own personal changes you wish to add to the game, moreso than listening to the discussion of the scene to which this thread is aimed towards and relates too. Yes, the US is banning him, however our competitive structure in Australia is vastly different to that of the states.
@Aces: Jaice rarely loses to MKs anyway, if ever. The Oli v MK MU is actually quite even. If you ban Falco and IC's he may rejoice though lol.
Tbh Shaya, it sounds more like a vandetta to have him banned for your own personal changes you wish to add to the game, moreso than listening to the discussion of the scene to which this thread is aimed towards and relates too. Yes, the US is banning him, however our competitive structure in Australia is vastly different to that of the states.
@Aces: Jaice rarely loses to MKs anyway, if ever. The Oli v MK MU is actually quite even. If you ban Falco and IC's he may rejoice though lol.
Your post doesn't make sense Adept.
Perhaps naivety is a better word?
Perhaps naivety is a better word?
Remastered
Smash Lord
D o e s i t h e l p i f I t y p e a l i t t l e s l o w e r ?
> Everyone agrees that MK is the best so I don't understand where that came from
You guys were talking about how good MK is. We already know how good MK is. A page or so was wasted talking about how good MK is.
> We understand how good he is and so does everyone else in the competitive community
Followed by
> There is no need to call people ignorant because quite frankly, you couldn't be more wrong
This is the part that doesn't make sense Adept.
> The only people who don't understand how good MK is, are those who are new to the scene, and those who haven't played the game enough to understand how he can abuse his tools.
Furthermore this is ironic coming from you. because you are new to this scene.
> vendetta
MMM.
I firmly believe my character goes close to even with Meta Knight. I do not have personal problems with playing meta knights in tournament. You're ignoring everything else I've said and as you do not understand why I'm saying what I'm saying you think I have a vendetta?
MK being in the game has halted this game's competitiveness for a very very VERY long time. How do we play this game competitively if we aren't playing to win? Not enough people in Australia are playing to win because they dislike meta knight. The incentives do not exist for people to play meta knight at this point either. We're playing this game with some sort of soft-ban honour system.
I'm sorry for wanting Australians to actually not have to play meta knight to be playing to win.
You guys were talking about how good MK is. We already know how good MK is. A page or so was wasted talking about how good MK is.
> We understand how good he is and so does everyone else in the competitive community
Followed by
> There is no need to call people ignorant because quite frankly, you couldn't be more wrong
This is the part that doesn't make sense Adept.
> The only people who don't understand how good MK is, are those who are new to the scene, and those who haven't played the game enough to understand how he can abuse his tools.
Furthermore this is ironic coming from you. because you are new to this scene.
> vendetta
MMM.
I firmly believe my character goes close to even with Meta Knight. I do not have personal problems with playing meta knights in tournament. You're ignoring everything else I've said and as you do not understand why I'm saying what I'm saying you think I have a vendetta?
MK being in the game has halted this game's competitiveness for a very very VERY long time. How do we play this game competitively if we aren't playing to win? Not enough people in Australia are playing to win because they dislike meta knight. The incentives do not exist for people to play meta knight at this point either. We're playing this game with some sort of soft-ban honour system.
I'm sorry for wanting Australians to actually not have to play meta knight to be playing to win.
Grim Tuesday
Smash Legend
So who in Australia that plays Brawl actually wants Meta Knight to stay legal?
Only people I know so far are Splice, Earl and AD3PT.
Only people I know so far are Splice, Earl and AD3PT.
I don't think this thread's going to turn good any time soon. Ad hominem has started, so it's only going to go down hill fast.
I didn't want to have a long winded or personal argument. I should've known better for opening a thread in the first place.
-.-
If you want to take your final pot shots adept/whoever, do so soon, I'll likely close the thread afterwards.
Thread conclusion:
QLD doesn't want to ban him?
Adelaide/Melbourne/Sydney have mixed opinions.
I didn't want to have a long winded or personal argument. I should've known better for opening a thread in the first place.
-.-
If you want to take your final pot shots adept/whoever, do so soon, I'll likely close the thread afterwards.
Thread conclusion:
QLD doesn't want to ban him?
Adelaide/Melbourne/Sydney have mixed opinions.
INFORMATION!!!
Smash Rookie
I want him gone, I also agree Snake v MK will get worse and worse. Despite how much I hate Diddy, I'd MUCH rather have him and co as the end.
*SA person opinion*
*SA person opinion*
It's pretty hard for MK to get in against Snake... If he makes a mistake once he can definitely be punished. He can try to push in with good spacing but the MU is even in that respect because Snake can deal with that and approaching a good Snake isn't an easy process for anyone.
As far as ROB goes, he would still have one -3 and more -2 then GaW does, and GaW is considered unviable and that is not because of MK at all. So I would figure ROB would still be unviable, and in VIC leish you would face the D3 vs ROB MU just as much as MK vs ROB. Maybe half as much I guess coz I think Toshi uses MK vs ROB? idk, it doesn't really matter in the case of Earl because he could use most characters and still beat all of us under him on the PR lol
Shaya, are you implying that if we ban MK, then everyone will start playing to win and use the new #1 character? That would worsen the situation wouldn't it? That's a void point because that trait in people to not main the #1 character will exist whether MK is banned or not. Or worse, it doesn't exist now but if you ban MK it might... so yeah don't know where you are going with that last paragraph.
Your accusations that MK has damaged the scene and would help the scene if he was banned are all unsubstantial beliefs that you hold, nothing you have provided so far is worthwhile information because all your points revolve around contradictions and accusations with lack of evidence.
@Grim: I don't think MK should be banned in Australia, but by posting here I never intended to have any affect on anyone because for a start I know the people that want MK banned are people I cannot sway or have their own reasons/attitude for disliking MK which are unlogical and therefore logic doesn't really help them. btw you are wrong I also don't know if Earl really cares, but I think he would for obvious reasons, but he doesn't come off that way. I think QLD won't end up banning MK though, seeing as the majority of people who make the Brawl scene thrive in QLD don't want MK banned, which I think is fair enough.
Havok I appreciate your post in this thread. Not because it kinda helps my side of the issue but moreso because I respect that overseas players would take the time to consider our issues, even if it is because it involves a video of you lol
As far as ROB goes, he would still have one -3 and more -2 then GaW does, and GaW is considered unviable and that is not because of MK at all. So I would figure ROB would still be unviable, and in VIC leish you would face the D3 vs ROB MU just as much as MK vs ROB. Maybe half as much I guess coz I think Toshi uses MK vs ROB? idk, it doesn't really matter in the case of Earl because he could use most characters and still beat all of us under him on the PR lol
Shaya, are you implying that if we ban MK, then everyone will start playing to win and use the new #1 character? That would worsen the situation wouldn't it? That's a void point because that trait in people to not main the #1 character will exist whether MK is banned or not. Or worse, it doesn't exist now but if you ban MK it might... so yeah don't know where you are going with that last paragraph.
Your accusations that MK has damaged the scene and would help the scene if he was banned are all unsubstantial beliefs that you hold, nothing you have provided so far is worthwhile information because all your points revolve around contradictions and accusations with lack of evidence.
@Grim: I don't think MK should be banned in Australia, but by posting here I never intended to have any affect on anyone because for a start I know the people that want MK banned are people I cannot sway or have their own reasons/attitude for disliking MK which are unlogical and therefore logic doesn't really help them. btw you are wrong
I also don't know if Earl really cares, but I think he would for obvious reasons, but he doesn't come off that way. I think QLD won't end up banning MK though, seeing as the majority of people who make the Brawl scene thrive in QLD don't want MK banned, which I think is fair enough.Havok I appreciate your post in this thread. Not because it kinda helps my side of the issue but moreso because I respect that overseas players would take the time to consider our issues, even if it is because it involves a video of you lol
Remastered
Smash Lord
I'm new still? That's awesome. I have only been playing in comps for 3 years so I can understand where you are coming from .
So I still don't understand why you called people ignorant, when it is only a lack of experience that hinders their understanding of MK. But wait, sorry I'm new so I'm ignorant too, and so is everyone else who doesn't 100% agree with an MK all out ban.
You have no possible way of telling whether MK's ban early in the piece would have improved the game for the better within competition. You also can't call a person ignorant on the grounds that they just don't see what you see. Difference of opinion and ignorance are 2 very different things Shaya.
@ Grim: I'm indifferent to the ban. I just think all avenues need to be considered thoroughly before changing the game so drastically.
.So I still don't understand why you called people ignorant, when it is only a lack of experience that hinders their understanding of MK. But wait, sorry I'm new so I'm ignorant too, and so is everyone else who doesn't 100% agree with an MK all out ban.
You have no possible way of telling whether MK's ban early in the piece would have improved the game for the better within competition. You also can't call a person ignorant on the grounds that they just don't see what you see. Difference of opinion and ignorance are 2 very different things Shaya.
@ Grim: I'm indifferent to the ban. I just think all avenues need to be considered thoroughly before changing the game so drastically.
^ I also have to say Shaya kinda made a mistake playing the elitism card.
I know Shaya has far more experienece than AD3PT but the elitism is generally a bad idea hey unless you aren't actually trying to be reasonable. Now that I think about it, the elitism card maybe is a good choice for Shaya in this situation...
I know Shaya has far more experienece than AD3PT but the elitism is generally a bad idea hey unless you aren't actually trying to be reasonable. Now that I think about it, the elitism card maybe is a good choice for Shaya in this situation...
While diddy would be no.1, the distance between #1 and #8 is less than the difference between MK and Diddy.
You shouldn't need to bring up this point.
Yet somehow its not just I who feels that way.
Yet somehow 75% of the american community feel that way. And while 75% of the aussie community may not feel that way, I would assume at least 50% of people do.
Contradictions though...mmm... okay.
Accusations with lack of evidence... mmm... okay.
Definitely interesting arguments there Splice.
-
Congratulations for playing this game for 3 years. Were you a top player during that time?
No, I do not feel that any person who thinks MK shouldn't be banned is wrong.
I feel that a guy who underrates MK (i.e. "60:40 with zelda" "goes close to even with olimar") while I communicate with the best Olimars/Zeldas in the US who tell me otherwise is the main crux of my 'elitist' card. I have a hard time respecting your opinion because you
1. Use MK
2. Are new to high level play
3. have opinions on specifics that do not correlate with players who are vastly superior to him in skill (and this vast superiority applies to not just you, but everyone else in australia)
You weren't active when Australia actually did have a large amount of meta knight players. Those players and many more have quit.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
No no no no no no no.
Sorry scrubs, can't let you do that.
Sorry scrubs, can't let you do that.
Scrubs
Smash Lord
Because Splice is a nice guy and belittling him on a spelling mistake isn't going to make this thread any better.
dean.
.
There's no way that R.O.B:Dedede is -3. -2 at the worst.
Apart from that I have nothing worthwhile to add to this thread :o I don't feel strongly either way on the issue. All I lose to is Diddys anyway -_-
Scrubs
Smash Lord
I know he is nice...It was constructive criticism
My argument in 2 major points.
1. People's opinions of Meta Knight and his dominance here are based on their own experiences and do not consider the past, nor other scenes.
a. I personally feel that Meta Knight has damaged Australia, from its early roots (where every eastern scene in australia had meta knights winning exclusively for the first year or twoish of the game), to a scene such as melbourne where complaints about Meta Knight were followed by a drop in tournament attendance.
2. Meta Knight is not a major problem in Australia, but that shouldn't be the reason why we keep him legal.
a. Ledge planking and time outs with MK, plus 'gay stages' were never a universal problem in Australia. However, we implemented LGLs, removed stages among other things to align ourselves with the States because there were countless piles of proof that they were problems. Even with these things existing in the states, the piles of proof of MK problems only grew, not rescinded.
b. Our Australian players have followed an honour system/soft ban on MK for almost our entire history. Any MK who 'played to win' would get a backlash of spite; this has happened countless times (e.g. Attila: I will quit this game because of Earl time outs). Ultimately, Australian players don't play to win, even if they do play meta knight.
c. Our honour system is not based on us being 'good' that we don't need to use MK, but that the level of incentives for using MK (and using him properly at that) [as in, statistically increasing their likelihood of being within the money from around 5% for other top tiers to 20-30% using MK]* when considering his negative stigma and lack of monetary availability just wasn't worth it for most of our players.
* In the US, 8% of tournament prize money goes to snake. Most of the other top tiers are 3.5-5%. Meta Knight is close to 20% of tournament prize money. Generally money = top 3 placements. The amount of MK's who get top placements (like top 8 at locals, top 16 at regionals/nationals) is quite scary.
1. People's opinions of Meta Knight and his dominance here are based on their own experiences and do not consider the past, nor other scenes.
a. I personally feel that Meta Knight has damaged Australia, from its early roots (where every eastern scene in australia had meta knights winning exclusively for the first year or twoish of the game), to a scene such as melbourne where complaints about Meta Knight were followed by a drop in tournament attendance.
2. Meta Knight is not a major problem in Australia, but that shouldn't be the reason why we keep him legal.
a. Ledge planking and time outs with MK, plus 'gay stages' were never a universal problem in Australia. However, we implemented LGLs, removed stages among other things to align ourselves with the States because there were countless piles of proof that they were problems. Even with these things existing in the states, the piles of proof of MK problems only grew, not rescinded.
b. Our Australian players have followed an honour system/soft ban on MK for almost our entire history. Any MK who 'played to win' would get a backlash of spite; this has happened countless times (e.g. Attila: I will quit this game because of Earl time outs). Ultimately, Australian players don't play to win, even if they do play meta knight.
c. Our honour system is not based on us being 'good' that we don't need to use MK, but that the level of incentives for using MK (and using him properly at that) [as in, statistically increasing their likelihood of being within the money from around 5% for other top tiers to 20-30% using MK]* when considering his negative stigma and lack of monetary availability just wasn't worth it for most of our players.
* In the US, 8% of tournament prize money goes to snake. Most of the other top tiers are 3.5-5%. Meta Knight is close to 20% of tournament prize money. Generally money = top 3 placements. The amount of MK's who get top placements (like top 8 at locals, top 16 at regionals/nationals) is quite scary.
I would like to know what I spelt wrong.
You are right that the distance between MK and Diddy in MUs (which tends to be what people think about when choosing an optimal character) would be an average of 1.8 advantage for MK and a 1.22 advantage for Diddy, and i think the 8th best character is Pikachu or something and the average MU advantage for Pikachu is 1. MK does deserve a tier of his own, and because he has no counters people know they don't NEED a secondary (outside of personal inability, for example one may secondary Pikachu because they find MK vs Falco hard, which is totally reasonable)
But that doesn't mean I accept your claim that playing the optimal character is how you must play to win because that still does imply that if Diddy is the optimal character with MK banned, then if Australia loses its "soft-ban honour" thing that you talked about, logically we would all pick up Diddy, and lose this soft ban honour thing because he isn't in his own tier at least.
Basically I'd really appreciate it if you'd just drop the whole "the only reason people don't use MK is because they aren't playing to win" issue because if that is true then that means we won't have a sudden surge of MKs, and if we ban MK and this is supposed to reignite spirit then it implies that we'd see a sudden surge of Diddys, so I think it is a bad argument for you to present... but more importantly... it upsets me when you say this.
In regards to the % of people who care...
again you provide statistics instead of reasoning (which are assumptions too, that's funny)
I know the majority POSSIBLY dislikes MK within Australia, that still wouldn't make it reasonable though.
:/
Also for the record; those MK players that you said quit (when you were talking to AD3PT), outside of NSW at least they did not quit because they were MK players. and the NSW MK players were not ever dominant to my understanding. I'm just saying this because I'm not sure why you said that.
ROB vs D3 is -3 in the MU chart, Dean, and i've seen Overseas players I respect agree with this.
If I was to use my own experience and knowledge of characters and MUs, I would think ROB had a lot more -3s than just MK and D3 anyway.
Luneth Mk is as good as Shaya says, but it's the impact he makes that is what we should note. Shaya knows MK has no counter and even if he goes even with other top tiers they have counters. SO whilst Snakes and MKs are on even ground when they vs (despite what Attila says), Snake will have a harder time advancing in the bracket anyway due to D3s, Dks, and Olimars, whereas MK won't have to face those obstacles, just the Snake, which may have lost to those obstacles earlier anway. That's how good MK is and I'm pretty sure Shaya would agree with the above statement (idk though hey).
But what's the impact of MK?
Earl placing 3rd at a Major and winning monthlies when Attila doesnt show up.
Lots of SA players using MK and failing hard (ghosts Diddy is better than his MK easily)
AD3PT doing alright with MK
NSW doesn't have tournaments anyway and it damn well isn't because of MK.
That's not really any significant impact for MK here over other characters
What's the impact if we ban him? It really can't benefit the scene because we have no problem to solve
it may only create problems
Shaya says that if we leave MK legal the situation would get worse
But thats less likely then the situation getting worse from banning him, especially because there is no eveidence to support that.
(this post does not reply to shayas last post because I am making a ham sandwich)
You are right that the distance between MK and Diddy in MUs (which tends to be what people think about when choosing an optimal character) would be an average of 1.8 advantage for MK and a 1.22 advantage for Diddy, and i think the 8th best character is Pikachu or something and the average MU advantage for Pikachu is 1. MK does deserve a tier of his own, and because he has no counters people know they don't NEED a secondary (outside of personal inability, for example one may secondary Pikachu because they find MK vs Falco hard, which is totally reasonable)
But that doesn't mean I accept your claim that playing the optimal character is how you must play to win because that still does imply that if Diddy is the optimal character with MK banned, then if Australia loses its "soft-ban honour" thing that you talked about, logically we would all pick up Diddy, and lose this soft ban honour thing because he isn't in his own tier at least.
Basically I'd really appreciate it if you'd just drop the whole "the only reason people don't use MK is because they aren't playing to win" issue because if that is true then that means we won't have a sudden surge of MKs, and if we ban MK and this is supposed to reignite spirit then it implies that we'd see a sudden surge of Diddys, so I think it is a bad argument for you to present... but more importantly... it upsets me when you say this.
In regards to the % of people who care...
again you provide statistics instead of reasoning (which are assumptions too, that's funny)
I know the majority POSSIBLY dislikes MK within Australia, that still wouldn't make it reasonable though.
:/
Also for the record; those MK players that you said quit (when you were talking to AD3PT), outside of NSW at least they did not quit because they were MK players. and the NSW MK players were not ever dominant to my understanding. I'm just saying this because I'm not sure why you said that.
ROB vs D3 is -3 in the MU chart, Dean, and i've seen Overseas players I respect agree with this.
If I was to use my own experience and knowledge of characters and MUs, I would think ROB had a lot more -3s than just MK and D3 anyway.
Luneth Mk is as good as Shaya says, but it's the impact he makes that is what we should note. Shaya knows MK has no counter and even if he goes even with other top tiers they have counters. SO whilst Snakes and MKs are on even ground when they vs (despite what Attila says), Snake will have a harder time advancing in the bracket anyway due to D3s, Dks, and Olimars, whereas MK won't have to face those obstacles, just the Snake, which may have lost to those obstacles earlier anway. That's how good MK is and I'm pretty sure Shaya would agree with the above statement (idk though hey).
But what's the impact of MK?
Earl placing 3rd at a Major and winning monthlies when Attila doesnt show up.
Lots of SA players using MK and failing hard (ghosts Diddy is better than his MK easily)
AD3PT doing alright with MK
NSW doesn't have tournaments anyway and it damn well isn't because of MK.
That's not really any significant impact for MK here over other characters
What's the impact if we ban him? It really can't benefit the scene because we have no problem to solve
it may only create problems
Shaya says that if we leave MK legal the situation would get worse
But thats less likely then the situation getting worse from banning him, especially because there is no eveidence to support that.
(this post does not reply to shayas last post because I am making a ham sandwich)
Jei Jei
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2007
- Messages
- 2,271
- Location
- Kings Park, Melbourne
- NNID
- Jei_Soul
- 3DS FC
- 1564-4103-8935
I was against the MK ban (I don't think I made that a secret) but the more I think about it the more it makes sense.
I remember even before the "metabourne" period Cobalt (Falco main but used MK more and more), Kulla and Amaterasu were the three top players in Aus. so Shaya's MK-damaged-Australia claim stands pretty strong.
I have a lot to say on my newly acquired change of mind but I really cbf. Like really, really cbf.
I remember even before the "metabourne" period Cobalt (Falco main but used MK more and more), Kulla and Amaterasu were the three top players in Aus. so Shaya's MK-damaged-Australia claim stands pretty strong.
I have a lot to say on my newly acquired change of mind but I really cbf. Like really, really cbf.
I would say my esteem for improving in this game has been low for a very long time.
If I wanted to get back into Brawl, my best chance would be to use meta knight.
Now, I USED to use MK, and I used to consider my MK one of the best in the country. I used to practice MK and the only two things that I would practise were:
1. Timing people out.
2. MK dittos.
However, I personally dislike his existence in Brawl due to being aware of what mass-playing-to-win results in: MK dittos, or MK timing you out.
Would banning MK increase my esteem?
Maybe
but why?
Because I don't want to use MK, and I thoroughly enjoy Marth too much to drop him. But I am definitely conflicted with that and wanting to win again. Considering Australia's lack of MK, my chances of becoming good again would remain similar with or without MK being legal. BUT I would feel a lot more confident in the work I would put in being worth a lot more due to just about every other top tier bar MK having similar power levels.
@Splice
Diddy is the best without MK legal, but that may change. I would like the game to change.
However, if Diddy remains the best, that doesn't change the likelihood that his viability is extremely similar to that of other characters.
Take the tier list.
MK is in his own tier (mostly agreed to), followed by a diddy, falco and snake tier (hello people who do good against MK) followed by other good characters who have relatively even match ups with other top tiers, and have various issues with MK (some not so much).
If I wanted to get back into Brawl, my best chance would be to use meta knight.
Now, I USED to use MK, and I used to consider my MK one of the best in the country. I used to practice MK and the only two things that I would practise were:
1. Timing people out.
2. MK dittos.
However, I personally dislike his existence in Brawl due to being aware of what mass-playing-to-win results in: MK dittos, or MK timing you out.
Would banning MK increase my esteem?
Maybe
but why?
Because I don't want to use MK, and I thoroughly enjoy Marth too much to drop him. But I am definitely conflicted with that and wanting to win again. Considering Australia's lack of MK, my chances of becoming good again would remain similar with or without MK being legal. BUT I would feel a lot more confident in the work I would put in being worth a lot more due to just about every other top tier bar MK having similar power levels.
@Splice
Diddy is the best without MK legal, but that may change. I would like the game to change.
However, if Diddy remains the best, that doesn't change the likelihood that his viability is extremely similar to that of other characters.
Take the tier list.
MK is in his own tier (mostly agreed to), followed by a diddy, falco and snake tier (hello people who do good against MK) followed by other good characters who have relatively even match ups with other top tiers, and have various issues with MK (some not so much).
swordsaint
Smash Master
i feel like a lot of people have reasonable opinions but can never word it right on the mk debate.
i know thats how i feel, and partly why I've made a grand total of 1 post (2 now here)
i think the very fact though, that there a multiple rules in place just to nerf him, and a more conservative stage list in most places because of him, removing him can only add more to the game.
i know thats how i feel, and partly why I've made a grand total of 1 post (2 now here)
i think the very fact though, that there a multiple rules in place just to nerf him, and a more conservative stage list in most places because of him, removing him can only add more to the game.
Following on from the point of 'esteem',
take scrubs.
He says he would go to more brawl events if MK was banned. He may not, but let's assume he does.
Why would he if MK was banned?
Because he is also aware that if he wanted to take the game seriously and play it competitively he should just use MK. But he doesn't want to. A horde of people like brawl competitively, but dislike MK's impacts on the game, a horde of other people dislike brawl competitively purely because of MK's impacts on the game.
take scrubs.
He says he would go to more brawl events if MK was banned. He may not, but let's assume he does.
Why would he if MK was banned?
Because he is also aware that if he wanted to take the game seriously and play it competitively he should just use MK. But he doesn't want to. A horde of people like brawl competitively, but dislike MK's impacts on the game, a horde of other people dislike brawl competitively purely because of MK's impacts on the game.
- Status