DDD's standing infinite should not be banned.

[_Keno_]

Edit: @CHEAP PEACH - fairness is completely and totally subjective. That's why it's not a good criteria for a ban.

Case in point: IC's grab. Being able to shieldgrab anything Ganon does and infinite him afterwards makes that matchup easily as hard as any DDD infinite matchup. Ban IC's infinite? Ban for just the Ganon matchup? What's fair?

ICs already destroy ganon without even using the CG. And as said in my earlier post, a single move that is completely broken and dramatically changes the match-up should be banned. Like if peach, who has a 60-40 matchup on sheik, suddenly gets a really easy to do setup 0-death combo on her, and that combo changes the matchup to 90-10 or something ridiculous, then it should be banned.

My personal criteria is a single moderately easy to do infinite that by itself sways a match-up to the point of a character being utterly broken against another.

 

[Ragnar0k]

You've offered no logical argument thus far. Prove to me that banning this infinite is any different than banning any technique that skews a matchup in any character's favor.

Protip: It's not. Stop crying.



But...but...this one's infinite!! It's...it's...easy to do! ...and stuff.

BOO FREAKIN HOO.

Wow, see what I mean. All anti ban does is basically say stop crying, we don't want our broken tactic that limits the metagame banned.

 

[Tien2500]

That's the point. And yes, I get it; you do not.

I don't care about your values, and you don't care about mine. How can you use subjective concepts like "pros", "cons", "fairness", and "unfairness" as a basis for a ban? What is "fairness"? Who gets to decide these things?

This is exactly why nobody takes pro-ban seriously in these types of discussions. It is quite literally whining on your part to come in here and demand that the entire metagame be changed to fit the purposes of your main at the expense of other characters; a main that nobody should be maining anyway because they suck so bad.

That's the point. Some guy sitting next to you at a tourney probably thinks "so and so" is gay and detrimental to his character. Are you really going to push the idea that all it takes is for someone to consider something "unfair" - whatever that even means - in order to get it banned?

Didn't think so.

I main ZSS. I don't get infinited. I don't even get normal CGed. And if Dedede didn't have his infinites? He'd still be S tier. He wouldn't really be hurt too much. He would just have to work a little to beat DK and Bowser as opposed to having free wins.

I can use subjective terms because this is not an exact science. Its a matter of opinion as to what would be better for the game/community. This isn't an objective argument.

If someone complains "so and so move is gay" we would have to judge that based on its own criteria. I think Dedede's is bannable based on the risk/reward involved in it and the ease of it.

 

[Brinzy]

The non ban community offers no logical argument as to why it shouldn't be banned. All they say is no and then type a bunch of irrelevant stuff bashing the pro banners and ask us things like why having more character viability is good.

Oh shut up and start reading without playing "us-them" and maybe it won't go over your ****ing head, +1 infraction here I come.

I hate to say it but every time I read an anti ban person's posts about why it should not be banned I feel like nothing they are saying has any meaning. It all feels like filler just to make their posts seem important.

Oh shut up and start reading without playing "us-them" and maybe it won't go over your ****ing head, +1 infraction here I come.

Wow, see what I mean. All anti ban does is basically say stop crying, we don't want our broken tactic that limits the metagame banned.

Metagame is not being limited by this. Are you serious? Are you seriously telling me that something that has been known for months has put the metagame at a total stop? Are you trying to tell me that DK's metagame has made NO progression whatsoever because of this?

Get real.


This thread is not good for me.

 

[RDK]

Wow, see what I mean. All anti ban does is basically say stop crying, we don't want our broken tactic that limits the metagame banned.

It doesn't limit the metagame, it limits DK's metagame. I don't know how many times I've said this.

I main ZSS. I don't get infinited. I don't even get normal CGed. And if Dedede didn't have his infinites? He'd still be S tier. He wouldn't really be hurt too much. He would just have to work a little to beat DK and Bowser as opposed to having free wins.

I can use subjective terms because this is not an exact science. Its a matter of opinion as to what would be better for the game/community. This isn't an objective argument.

So banning one tactic to help one character's metagame at the expense of another character is acceptable? Where do we draw the line? What if an infinite comes out tomorrow that's just a little bit less detrimental than D3's? And one comes out the next day that's just a little bit less detrimental than that one, ad infinitum? What is your definition of "unfair"?

I'd like some "exact science" on this, or else your assertions mean nothing.

If someone complains "so and so move is gay" we would have to judge that based on its own criteria. I think Dedede's is bannable based on the risk/reward involved in it and the ease of it.

How much risk vs. reward does it take? How easy does something have to be? I want exact numbers and units of measurement.

 

[Nanaki]

Lemme guess. You play MK then?

Nope.

I never said you had to play MK to give yourself the best chance to win. Playstyles differ.

I'm talking about the potential spectators out there who may be checking the came out on closed circuit or whatever and think its cool.

As for some sort of empirical proof of attendance going up with character diverstity. Obviously no way I could get that sort of data. Or if there were its more effort to obtain than I'm willing to put into this argument.

I think fun is very important. There is a reason that people pick brawl over other competitive pursuits and over other competitive games. Because for whatever reason they find the game to be more enjoyable than the other alternatives.

So I've answered your questions to the best of my ability so I ask you. What are the benefits to keeping Dedede's infinite?

I'm going to intentionally strawman your question. Don't worry, there's still an answer in here.

There are no direct benefits to the gameplay of the game itself by keeping the infinite. However, banning a technique to artificially change matchups when the metagame does not revolve around said technique makes so sense from a competitive point of view. By that standard, we can effectively ban any technique in the name of 'fairness' in order to even matchups.

The solution is to simply let bad characters be bad - showing favoritism towards a character by evening their matchups makes absolutely no sense.

 

[_Keno_]

Some of you are immune to common sense, it's just plainly obvious that it is broken and screws over all the characters that it can be used against. I dont see why we even need to give useless "scientifically super duper logical" data to prove a point.

 

[Brinzy]

Some of you are immune to common sense

Some of you are oblivious to large/red/bolded text that refutes your trash over and over again.

 

[Nanaki]

Sorry ahead of time if this is a double post, I'm trying to answer everyone and this is moving fast.

I hate to say it but every time I read an anti ban person's posts about why it should not be banned I feel like nothing they are saying has any meaning. It all feels like filler just to make their posts seem important.

This entire post was filler, and a +1 post count. If you don't have anything to say that matters, shut the **** up.

Tell me something with meaning. I asked you a question, why didn't you answer it instead of *****ing about how I told you to stop crying?

ICs already destroy ganon without even using the CG. And as said in my earlier post, a single move that is completely broken and dramatically changes the match-up should be banned. Like if peach, who has a 60-40 matchup on sheik, suddenly gets a really easy to do setup 0-death combo on her, and that combo changes the matchup to 90-10 or something ridiculous, then it should be banned.

My personal criteria is a single moderately easy to do infinite that by itself sways a match-up to the point of a character being utterly broken against another.

Let me follow this logic as well as I can.

-A single move that is completely broken and dramatically changes the matchup should be banned.

-IC's infinite is completely broken and dramatically changes the Ganon matchup (if he can hit their shield and not die from it, the matchup isn't really anywhere near as bad).

-IC's infinite is not worthy of a ban.

-What?

And don't bring up anything about moderately easy to do. Ease of use is not a factor in banning in any way. If it can be done, it can be mastered.

Wow, see what I mean. All anti ban does is basically say stop crying, we don't want our broken tactic that limits the metagame banned.

Stop crying. I don't want this notbroken tactic that doesn't limit the metagame banned.

 

[Silfa]

What's with all the Ganon comparisons? Ganon isn't DK.

DK is a completely viable character, it's just a single move that can infinite into itself that prevents that. There is no other character and no other move that makes DK an unviable character. Ganon is unviable for a multitude of reasons and DK does not have such limitations.

Creating diversity and additional viable characters will not do nearly as much for the metagame as people 'not crying' though, right?

 

[Ragnar0k]

limited =/= completely prevent, stop trying to change my point and argue about something else. DK's metagame would undoubtedly advance much faster if people thought he could be used viably in tournaments without having to worry about a single broken tactic that kills his potential. DK's metagame is part of the metagame. No matter how many times you say that limiting DK's metagame doesn't limit the metagame still makes you wrong.

 

[_Keno_]

Some of you are oblivious to large/red/bolded text that refutes your trash over and over again.

Saying it refutes and it actually refuting are two separate things.

 

[MarkLoo]

infinite grabbing is stupid

 

[Ragnar0k]

Your side was all filler posts so I made 1 single filler post to tell you that and then you filled another post with nothing telling me I make filler posts. See where this is going?

 

[Nanaki]

What's with all the Ganon comparisons? Ganon isn't DK.

DK is a completely viable character, it's just a single move that can infinite into itself that prevents that. There is no other character and no other move that makes DK an unviable character. Ganon is unviable for a multitude of reasons and DK does not have such limitations.

Creating diversity and additional viable characters will not do nearly as much for the metagame as people 'not crying' though, right?

Who cares if he's not DK? Why should DK get to be viable? Why should we ban 1 technique for him when we could ban lots of stuff to make Ganon viable? I'm going to keep making the comparison until someone tells me why this should be so.

If artificially making characters viable for 'diversity' improves the metagame, why not make them all viable?

 

[RDK]

So is a "single tactic" the requirement now? What exactly is the requirement? Two tactics of slightly less impact? A bunch of different factors that all add up? I want exact measurements.

Nobody from pro-ban has answered this yet.

Cheap Peach: if all it takes is common sense then you would expect a complete monkey to be able to explain it. Unfortunately it seems like you can't do so. Feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[Brinzy]

DK is a completely viable character, it's just a single move that can infinite into itself that prevents that. There is no other character and no other move that makes DK an unviable character. Ganon is unviable for a multitude of reasons and DK does not have such limitations.

Stop using viable as standalone.

DK is viable if you get one character to take out his one matchup he's doomed to lose. That's not even a theorycraft thing. That's pretty much a fact right there.

He's also not a standalone character, but as far as that goes, tough break. You don't ban something so somebody can stand on his own two feet.

limited =/= completely prevent, stop trying to change my point and argue about something else. DK's metagame would undoubtedly advance much faster if people thought he could be used viably in tournaments without having to worry about a single broken tactic that kills his potential. DK's metagame is part of the metagame. No matter how many times you say that limiting DK's metagame doesn't limit the metagame still makes you wrong.

DDD's metagame is part of the metagame, banning this would limit DDD's metagame and thus limit the metagame.


Get. Better. Arguments.

And as for the stuff about DK, I was thinking of another "tough break" post, but it's not a tough break. Host a tournament with it banned. Play at tournaments with it banned. Go to areas where it's banned and play the character. There are places where this thing has pretty much no influence on how he can do in tournaments. If people don't want to play a character because he was one glaring flaw (as opposed to half of the cast's bazillion flaws), then they're stupid.

You're kidding yourself and everyone if you think that this is seriously holding DK back. Anyone decent and somewhat intelligent would know that this isn't the nail in the coffin for him. In fact, he's not even nailed in a coffin because he's still pretty lively despite the oh-so-terrible thing we're talking about here.

Saying it refutes and it actually refuting are two separate things.

HURDURR, WHUDATHUNK IT.

And yeah, it has been refuted already, check this thread and all the others like it. If it were never refuted and made sense, this would be officially banned, but guess what, it isn't.

 

[Silfa]

Who cares if he's not DK? Why should DK get to be viable? Why should we ban 1 technique for him when we could ban lots of stuff to make Ganon viable? I'm going to keep making the comparison until someone tells me why this should be so.

If artificially making characters viable for 'diversity' improves the metagame, why not make them all viable?

DK mains obviously care. (Screw them and they're pathetic character, right?)

There is one single move that makes DK unviable. A single move that can be used as a regular chaingrab anyway.

One move.

 

[Tien2500]

So banning one tactic to help one character's metagame at the expense of another character is acceptable? Where do we draw the line? What if an infinite comes out tomorrow that's just a little bit less detrimental than D3's? And one comes out the next day that's just a little bit less detrimental than that one, ad infinitum? What is your definition of "unfair"?

I'd like some "exact science" on this, or else your assertions mean nothing.



If you want some exact science... you're not going to get it. At least not from me. I simply don't think this matter requires that level of evidence. Brawl is simply never going to be an exact science because there is no one "best" metagame or anything. Like you said different people see value in different things so obviously noone can say whats "best" for the game. In my humble opinion banning the infinite is the better option.

As for the slippery slope argument I just don't buy that. I think we're smart enough to judge things individually. Many big tourneys have banned Dedede's infinites and some other standing infinites I believe by we haven't seen them banning things like ZSS' infinites and other such things. So... on what basis do you conclude that banning one thing will lead to banning another?

How much risk vs. reward does it take? How easy does something have to be? I want exact numbers and units of measurement.

I can't give exact numbers but a six frame grab (I'm pretty sure it is) that can be used OOS, is incredibly easy, from the character with the longest grab range in the game meets the criteria for me.

I'm going to intentionally strawman your question. Don't worry, there's still an answer in here.

There are no direct benefits to the gameplay of the game itself by keeping the infinite. However, banning a technique to artificially change matchups when the metagame does not revolve around said technique makes so sense from a competitive point of view. By that standard, we can effectively ban any technique in the name of 'fairness' in order to even matchups.

The solution is to simply let bad characters be bad - showing favoritism towards a character by evening their matchups makes absolutely no sense.

I don't think we should change things to make matchups more even. Like Falco's lasers hurt ZSS alot, and Marth/Yoshi's chain releases kill Squirtle but I wouldn't argue for those things to be banned.

Again I'd have to say the difference here is the ease. I'm fully confident that within a week of practice I could take a set off of a top DK using Dedede and I don't think you can say that for really any other tech in this game. A noob ZSS isn't beating a good ROB infinite or no.

 

[Nanaki]

Your side was all filler posts so I made 1 single filler post to tell you that and then you filled another post with nothing telling me I make filler posts. See where this is going?

Oh my lord, this is getting ridiculous. I don't want to be a lamer and report your spammy nonsense, but I will if you keep this crap up. Seriously, when I respond to your spam and tell you to stop, at least I do something useful elsewhere in the post.

infinite grabbing is stupid

Sadly, this seems to be the crux of the argument.

So is a "single tactic" the requirement now? What exactly is the requirement? Two tactics of slightly less impact? A bunch of different factors that all add up? I want exact measurements.

Nobody from pro-ban has answered this yet.

Cheap Peach: if all it takes is common sense then you would expect a complete monkey to be able to explain it. Unfortunately it seems like you can't do so. Feel free to prove me wrong.

Apparently it requires the tactic to be easy to do. It also apparently requires it to be done by a high tier character on lower tier characters, so that more can be 'viable'.

Someone tell me I'm wrong.

 

[Ragnar0k]

1 characters ridiculously matchup breaking infinite limits the metagame as a whole more than banning it and allowing 8 other characters to be viable.

8>1

edit: lol I meant to say I was going to stop in my last post, but then you replied to it anyway. I guess you didn't understand when I asked if you saw where this was going.

 

[Tien2500]

Apparently it requires the tactic to be easy to do. It also apparently requires it to be done by a high tier character on lower tier characters, so that more can be 'viable'.

Someone tell me I'm wrong.

I don't think hightier character is a requirement. Its just that if a bottom tier character has an infinite its really not worth discussing because of how rarely it occurs.

 

[Brinzy]

DK mains obviously care. (Screw them and they're pathetic character, right?)

There is one single move that makes DK unviable. A single move that can be used as a regular chaingrab anyway.

One move.

I've seen DK mains say, "lol, really? I can CP and nobody does it to me anyway because they don't want to make an *** out of themselves."

Selectivity is funny.


There is one single move that makes DK unable to stand on his own two feet at any place where this is legal. Everywhere else, this does not exist.


What's this even doing for you, anyway?

1 characters ridiculously matchup breaking infinite limits the metagame as a whole more than banning it and allowing 8 other characters to be viable.

8>1

I literally banged my head against the ****ing desk when I read this.

If you think that this thing makes EIGHT characters nonviable, you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Stop posting, PLEASE, for the love of your god or a lack of one.

I don't think hightier character is a requirement. Its just that if a bottom tier character has an infinite its really not worth discussing because of how rarely it occurs.

Do you realize how rarely this occurs? Discrimination is bad for this.

 

[Ragnar0k]

Infinites reduce character viability in general. DK has an infinite against ness and lucas but I'd say ban that too. I'm not just crying because I main DK.

 

[TP]

You CAN'T pick DK on your opponent's CP. No matter who you are and no matter who they are and no matter what stage it is, if you do that they will go DDD and you lose. That is why difficulty and complexity is relevant. I can go Ganon and not have to worry about the opponent going IC's or Shieik and beating me, because so few people know how to do the chaingrabs or perfect chain-camping. EVERYONE can do the DDD infinite.

 

[Nanaki]

DK mains obviously care. (Screw them and they're pathetic character, right?)

There is one single move that makes DK unviable. A single move that can be used as a regular chaingrab anyway.

One move.

Other character mains care that their character isn't viable too. But DK mains are more important, right?

One move. I get it. Why is that important, again?

I can't give exact numbers but a six frame grab (I'm pretty sure it is) that can be used OOS, is incredibly easy, from the character with the longest grab range in the game meets the criteria for me.



I don't think we should change things to make matchups more even. Like Falco's lasers hurt ZSS alot, and Marth/Yoshi's chain releases kill Squirtle but I wouldn't argue for those things to be banned.

Again I'd have to say the difference here is the ease. I'm fully confident that within a week of practice I could take a set off of a top DK using Dedede and I don't think you can say that for really any other tech in this game. A noob ZSS isn't beating a good ROB infinite or no.

I think it's great that you could beat a top DK using DDD. He'd be dumb to play the matchup against ANYONE.

1 characters ridiculously matchup breaking infinite limits the metagame as a whole more than banning it and allowing 8 other characters to be viable.

8>1

edit: lol I meant to say I was going to stop in my last post, but then you replied to it anyway. I guess you didn't understand when I asked if you saw where this was going.

Where are you getting 8 from? All but 2 can mash out, therefore it's not a true 'infinite', and really isn't that crippling.

I saw where it was going. I responded to point out that at least when I reply to your filler bull****, I say something useful. You still haven't.

 

[Brinzy]

You CAN'T pick DK on your opponent's CP. No matter who you are and no matter who they are and no matter what stage it is, if you do that they will go DDD and you lose. That is why difficulty and complexity is relevant. I can go Ganon and not have to worry about the opponent going IC's or Shieik and beating me, because so few people know how to do the chaingrabs or perfect chain-camping. EVERYONE can do the DDD infinite.

You can pick DK on your CP, unless he's going lolDDD anyway.

Going DK on your opponent's CP would be silly anyway.

 

[Ragnar0k]

I'm done here. All people do in this thread is flame.

/unsubscribe

 

[_Keno_]

DDD's metagame is part of the metagame, banning this would limit DDD's metagame and thus limit the metagame.

If you truly believe that banning DDD's CG would limit the metagame, then I have no reason to read anymore of your posts.

Also RDK, I already gave my personal opinion of what is ban worthy, a page or two ago.

 

[Tien2500]

I think it's great that you could beat a top DK using DDD. He'd be dumb to play the matchup against ANYONE.

Lol. It seems like we've come to a standstill. Its a matter of opinion I guess. I think it sucks that I could beat a top DK with Dedede and I'm sure he'd think it sucks too.

Where are you getting 8 from? All but 2 can mash out, therefore it's not a true 'infinite', and really isn't that crippling.

Correct me if I'm wrong but can't the others only mash out at high percentages?
[/QUOTE]

 

[Brinzy]

Infinites reduce character viability in general. DK has an infinite against ness and lucas but I'd say ban that too. I'm not just crying because I main DK.

You keep saying what you want to happen but you are not explaining why besides "it's not fair." I agree that it isn't fair for them, but that is not enough to get something banned everywhere that wants to be taken seriously.

 

[TP]

Going DK on your opponent's CP would be silly anyway.

If the infinite is banned, I disagree. Obviously he can get setup with a tough matchup, but that's how CPing works. We can't all main MK and be immune to it. DK would be a perfectly adequate choice on your opponent's CP if they pick Luigi's Mansion or Brinstar, for example, but only with the infinite banned.

 

[Red Arremer]

Man this thread's stupid.

"So few" people know how to do the IC infinite? LOL.
And Sheik would still **** Ganon even without the chain-camping.

Besides this, Donkey Kong has ways to avoid the grabs, and if your opponent doesn't know how to play Dedede well and only spams grabs, you can easily defeat him if you know how to play Donkey Kong yourself.

Correct me if I'm wrong but can't the others only mash out at high percentages?

They can mash out UNTIL high percents. The Chaingrab becomes an Infinite once these 3 characters (Mario, Luigi and Samus) reach Kill-%.

 

[Brinzy]

If you truly believe that banning DDD's CG would limit the metagame, then I have no reason to read anymore of your posts.

What are you, a ****ing idiot? I was throwing his bad logic right back at him to show how bad it was.

Notice how you didn't say anything to him even though he used the same exact bad logic.

Shut the hell up and stop selectively reading, +1 infraction.

If the infinite is banned, I disagree.

Was def. assuming that the infinite was not banned, since in a banned environment none of this even matters.

 

[Silfa]

Other character mains care that their character isn't viable too. But DK mains are more important, right?

One move. I get it. Why is that important, again?

It's important because everyone seems to say 'why don't we ban all these things to make x character/s viable?' A number of things would have to be done in comparison to one. It's not something to be disregarded when you use 'why only DK and not others?' as your reason to have it not banned.

Tbh, I don't really care that much about the argument. It's just little things that seem to have got me slightly annoyed somewhere. I don't even know what it was now.

 

[Nanaki]

I'm done here. All people do in this thread is flame.

/unsubscribe

Except we provide arguments that you choose to ignore in favor of spamming and/or stating totally wrong information. Bye bye!

If you truly believe that banning DDD's CG would limit the metagame, then I have no reason to read anymore of your posts.

Also RDK, I already gave my personal opinion of what is ban worthy, a page or two ago.

It would limit the metagame as much as not banning it would.

How would DK being viable change the metagame at all except for that one matchup? None of the top tiers give a **** about DK anyway, except maaaaybe Snake.

You CAN'T pick DK on your opponent's CP. No matter who you are and no matter who they are and no matter what stage it is, if you do that they will go DDD and you lose. That is why difficulty and complexity is relevant. I can go Ganon and not have to worry about the opponent going IC's or Shieik and beating me, because so few people know how to do the chaingrabs or perfect chain-camping. EVERYONE can do the DDD infinite.

So don't pick DK on your opponent's CP. Or Bowser. Or Ness. or Lucas. Bad characters are bad on your opponent's CP.

I don't think hightier character is a requirement. Its just that if a bottom tier character has an infinite its really not worth discussing because of how rarely it occurs.

So, for a ban:

-Must be easy to do.
-Must reduce character diversity.
-Must be a common occurence.
-Must be pertinent to an otherwise viable character.

Those are some silly reasons for a ban, and would not fly in any other competitive fighting game environment.

 

[_Keno_]

What are you, a ****ing idiot? I was throwing his bad logic right back at him to show how bad it was.

Oh, I just skim through people whom might be trolling or just plain dumb. I actually read what RDK and Nanaki say.

And why are we even bring other characters into this thread? Ganon vs ICs is a separate case, if you want to talk about banning or not banning that, make another thread. We are here discussing if DDD's infinite chaingrab.

 

[Zankoku]

Dedede's standing infinite, frankly, does not affect enough of the tournament environment to be considered worthy of enforcing a ban standard.

 

[swordgard]

Yo guys, can we ban snakes nades, they really tend to be hard for my ice climbers to beat. They reduce the matchup to 100:0, are easy to spam, and i have beaten many good ice climbers with snake by spamming nade.


Why doesnt SBR approve of my idea Q.Q There is no reason not to do it, therefore it should be banned. When i read people like ankoku who disagree, i can clearly see that they are either trolling me or are just plain blind to the obvious truth of how broken, unfun and unfair this is.



See what i did there?

 

[Big O]

I don't understand how people think they're being so smart with their "easy" solution of just banning it because it "hurts nobody", yet apparently this wonderful intelligence of theirs somehow isn't enough for them to realize that they're asking for disadvantageous matchups when they have a 100% chance of getting even better odds by playing another ****ing character.

I really didn't want to post anymore in this thread because it started to feel like a waste of time (for both sides) but this post was too facepalm inducing to ignore. So every time anyone sticks with any character but MK (objectively the safest choice based on MU ratios) on the opponent's CP they are being stupid? So Ally has a 100% better chance of beating a D3 main by going MK on his opponent's CP than sticking with Snake? So just by having a slightly disadvantaged MU (what it would be w/o the infinite) all the work you put into your main means less than going MK (or any other secondary) despite you not being as good with MK? There is no guarantee that you will do better with your secondary on their CP since they can pick that secondary's worst MU (D3 infinite on DK and other cases like it are the exceptions). The chances of getting better odds on their CP by picking another character is not 100% (not close to 100% either). To say otherwise is just plain wrong.

Insulting and belittling or intelligence with such a condescending tone wasn't very cool either (especially since what you brought up was nonsense). You seemed like a nice guy and had my respect despite our difference of opinion. Now you've lost it (I doubt you care...).