Kokiden
Smash Ace
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2019
- Messages
- 782
It is definitely "both are true." That's right.It's one of those 'both are true' situations. Generally the consensus seems to be that Onin is carried by Steve and ONLY that. It's important to emphasize the other side.
That's why I said it's both. It's just very annoying when people completely discount the character's part in it, and say it's only skill, when no, that's not the case at all. The reverse is true, too.
If it was all skill, then we should be seeing Isabelle's or other character's, but we're not.
No, that was not the point of my post at all.I mean yeah, players benefit from picking good characters. What a shock. You think Leo got to 5th place JUST because he's Leo and not because he was piloting a different busted character to power through his relative inconsistent play? We tend to evaluate in terms of player vs player because every character used in top level play has strong, sometimes busted tools that allow the player to apply their skillset most effectively. Steve is absolutely no different in this regard, and just because he may end up being the "best" of the busted top tier when everything shakes out doesn't mean he should be treated different than any other character.
Steve is not going to achieve a win rate remotely high enough to even consider the idea of a ban, which I think was the entire point of his post, correct me if I'm wrong.
My point is, it is tiring to see black and white takes. In regards to this situation, I'm seeing takes where bans should never be considered under any circumstances, because it is 100% the player, and nothing to do with the character, which is ass tbh.
The truth is it's a combination of both.
My point is these types of discussions should never be completely of the table.
Most of the times calls for bans are outright dumb, but that's not to say, that sometimes, it might be warranted.
I am seeing too many takes where we should never, ever, talk about bans. The thing is, hypothetically speaking, even if there are 7 Steve's in top 8's, you're still going to see people say "Nah, it's not the character, nothings wrong" and that is what annoys me: the complete and utter refusal to think maybe, perhaps, there is something actually wrong with a character.
Refer to my post above since I already addressed this.Things aren't so black and white; some of the takes on this topic here and across smash media are sort of insane to me--everything from Onin is completely carried and only beat Leo because of Steve to maybe top players aren't actually good to Onin is clearly #1 and better than Acola.
All of the following could be simultaneously true:
- Steve mains don't need to learn matchups in the way that most other characters do
- Steve is the strongest character
- Onin is a top player and very skilled, independent of Steve
- Onin is particularly skilled at playing Steve (like Maister with Game and Watch), instead of being a generalist
A number of other combinations exist; this is just one possible reality.
If you want a ban, ban criteria has to be different from "this character always wins." Because no character will always win. Player skill and diversity of character choice ensure that. You will always encounter the argument that X player beat Y character, so Y is beatable, if you choose "winning a lot" as your precondition.
Basically, pick a different framework to justify a call to ban. Onin winning a couple of tournaments isn't it, or else we'd have banned Joker back when Leo was doing well with him.
I just don't like the approach where someone dunks their head in the sand and never entertains the possibility of something happening. It's like watching Top 12 have 9 Steve's, all newcomers who are just trolling, where they play a completely different game from all the other characters on the roster, and still saying "Nah I see nothing wrong here. It's never the character at all."
I just don't get where all the denial is coming from.
At the end of the day, it's not up to me, but going by how the previous smash games were treated, even if, hypothetically, this character completely dominates the meta, the mindset I'm seeing going around now is "Nah... it's fine. We should never think about bans. Ever."
I don't really condone banning characters, since most of the characters I hate are just obnoxious at worst, but if a character completely plays a different game, doesn't even need to try to best someone else, and just invalidates characters in general because they can't do anything to him, then yes, perhaps it's time to at least think about it seriously instead of outright refusing to contemplate it.