Criteria For Banning a Character in Smash 4

[sneakytako]

As Xyro and SMFP have eloquently illustrated, it is painfully obvious that MK has dominated the top positions in Brawl for quite some time. However the point of this thread is not to debate a proposal to ban MK from future brawl tournaments, but to establish some kind of criteria to ban a character based on the results of brawl tournaments we have seen thus far. I believe that the timing to banning MK is far past, and is too late at this time.

To first start this discussion, we need first a consensus that MK should have been banned. The most logical place to start would be the actual results of large tournaments. Ktar and Apex both had MK ditto GF with 5/8 of the top 8 spots filled with MK. I would prefer not to go into mechanical elements of MK that merit a ban, but if you must make an argument that MK should not be/been banned please at least give some kind of explanation with evidence.

More importantly, I think it is imperative that we use this history as a learning experience to set some criteria to analyze if any characters in the upcoming smash 4 (or PM if applicable) merits a review. Like I've stated earlier the easiest area to debate would be raw results, but of course there must be a span to actually learn the game as a community before we see the first 10 tournaments filled with Megaman winners, just because everyone wants to play megaman. What does everyone think are good criteria to judge the 'eligibility' of a character for a new game?

 

[popsofctown]

I wish there was a more appropriate subforum for this. The smash 4 stage legality thread also feels lost in the woods.

 

[LancerStaff]

Well,we should at least ban a MK level character a heck of a lot sooner then MK was. What's Fox,Falco and Shiek's win percents?

 

[popsofctown]

I'm assuming you mean in Melee, and isn't marth usually included in that bunch to form a quartet?

 

[LancerStaff]

Those three were considered to be far ahead of everybody else early on in Melee, weren't they? Yaknow, the F/F/S thing.

 

[Xyro77]

As Xyro and SMFP have eloquently illustrated, it is painfully obvious that MK has dominated the top positions in Brawl for quite some time. However the point of this thread is not to debate a proposal to ban MK from future brawl tournaments, but to establish some kind of criteria to ban a character based on the results of brawl tournaments we have seen thus far. I believe that the timing to banning MK is far past, and is too late at this time.

To first start this discussion, we need first a consensus that MK should have been banned. The most logical place to start would be the actual results of large tournaments. Ktar and Apex both had MK ditto GF with 5/8 of the top 8 spots filled with MK. I would prefer not to go into mechanical elements of MK that merit a ban, but if you must make an argument that MK should not be/been banned please at least give some kind of explanation with evidence.

More importantly, I think it is imperative that we use this history as a learning experience to set some criteria to analyze if any characters in the upcoming smash 4 (or PM if applicable) merits a review. Like I've stated earlier the easiest area to debate would be raw results, but of course there must be a span to actually learn the game as a community before we see the first 10 tournaments filled with Megaman winners, just because everyone wants to play megaman. What does everyone think are good criteria to judge the 'eligibility' of a character for a new game?

Ive been running events/posting on SWF and proving the "smash government" wrong since 2004 (in melee and brawl). During this time i have learned something very very very important that i wish more TOs would learn.

Do what you want and do not rely on the smash government/rule makers of SWF to do the right thing,

MK has proven to be a problem since late 2008 and has not stopped in 6 years. We have had to create tons of rules just to keep him legal (lgl/scrooging/planking/idc/no double mk in 2vs2....ect) and he STILL dominates. I was part of the BBR once and they had a thread that was basically trying to figure out how many tornadoes should be allowed per match. LMFAO! At that point, i realized that the people who make the rules are not worried about the health and longevity of the game. Instead, they just want their friends who use mk to still be able to play / they still wanna make entry fee money off of all the mk users out there.

So again, do what you want (within reason, of course) and do not listen to what the smash government/rule makers say.





edit: snake was the most popular character winning/placing well when brawl came out in early/mid 2008 and we now know he def isnt the best char. So please dont jump on MegaMans case just yet.

 

[TheRage]

There's not enough information about this yet, and I don't think there will be until a year or so after the game is released. Therefore, banning a character this early is pointless given the little data that has so far accumulated.

 

[Dark 3nergy]

Ive been running events/posting on SWF and proving the "smash government" wrong since 2004 (in melee and brawl). During this time i have learned something very very very important that i wish more TOs would learn.

Do what you want and do not rely on the smash government/rule makers of SWF to do the right thing,

MK has proven to be a problem since late 2008 and has not stopped in 6 years. We have had to create tons of rules just to keep him legal (lgl/scrooging/planking/idc/no double mk in 2vs2....ect) and he STILL dominates. I was part of the BBR once and they had a thread that was basically trying to figure out how many tornadoes should be allowed per match. LMFAO! At that point, i realized that the people who make the rules are not worried about the health and longevity of the game. Instead, they just want their friends who use mk to still be able to play / they still wanna make entry fee money off of all the mk users out there.

So again, do what you want (within reason, of course) and do not listen to what the smash government/rule makers say.





edit: snake was the most popular character winning/placing well when brawl came out in early/mid 2008 and we now know he def isnt the best char. So please dont jump on MegaMans case just yet.

Ban criteria is very important as the op said and i agree with him. However we all need to listen to what xyro has to say in this quote. TOs are what run the show not a government. Good on you xyro.

 

[Djent]

If tournament results and/or winnings are going to factor in, it's important to establish a timespan over which the ban criteria have to be satisfied. For instance, "after _ months of a character winning half of all tournament money," or "after _ majors in which a character occupies 4/8 or more of the top spots, we ban this character." Those seem like silly examples, but Xyro's concern is legitimate - what dominates in the early game won't necessarily (and in fact, rarely) continues to dominate later on. We might even agree on a "grace period" of some number of months, in which only obviously gamebreaking things are bannable (and not merely "overcentralizing" ones) just to let things settle out.

 

[LancerStaff]

I doubt we'll ever need to ban another character though. MK only happened because Sakurai thought they didn't need to focus on balancing that much. Somebody might get to 50% of winnings again, but not for long without a major glitch.

 

[lordvaati]

Reasonable criteria for ban:
-if a character has no true weaknesses,bad matups or bad stages
-if a character requires constant modifications to their tech or play style to keep them legal(ex. Ledge grab Limit or IDC ban)
-if an arguably legal neutral/counter pick is ban able for ONLY that character's exploiis and nothing else
-if a character's tech creates a true inescapable 0-death combo
-if a characters tech creates a game crashing bug
-if a character has properties that absolutely limit certain basic moves(ex. Giga Bowser not having a Grab box)
-if a character generates an 66% or higher win rate in tournaments in the country

If a character meets 4/7 of the requirements, they can be banned. If they meet 3/7 of these, then a community vote can be compiled for legality or a proposal for soft ban can be made.

 

[Jamesbrice]

Ive been operating events/posting on SWF and showing the "smash government" incorrect since 2004 (in melee and brawl). During now i have discovered something very very very essential that i wish more TOs would understand.

rachel pally | susana monaco

 

[Ksn245]

Instead of banning characters, Nintendo should just release updates for the game that nerfs/buffs characters or adds new stuff.

 

[smashmachine]

Instead of banning characters, Nintendo should just release updates for the game that nerfs/buffs characters or adds new stuff.

yeah, but I have my doubts about patches for this game

 

[Vkrm]

The problem I have with SMFP's post is that he/she seems more concerned about brawl's longevity and doesn't necessarily believe meta knight is far enough above IC'S to warrant a ban, but I'd hate to put words in his mouth. Besides isn't MK one of the more exciting characters in the game?