Feelings on MK and the MK ban after Apex

[Thino]

Actually no. It has always been part of the reasoning for the ban.

Here's how it went

1. US banned MK
2. Players stated that if Euro/Japan hadn't banned him what made US think their region was special and needed to?
3. The response was that the US had all the best MKs by FAR and thus dominated their region. They had evolved his metagame to make him the most broken he could be and thus now was banworthy.
4. After Apex this assumptions have been proven false. Japanese MKs won both singles and doubles.

I agree, but my point still stands that its still too easy for them to counter, they just have to say:

-This is just one tournament, it doesn't prove that Japan has in fact a better metagame than U.S
-Japan has won with MK, which further proves that MK is broken and, therefore, should stay banned.

and since, in this case, most of the group of TOs that is the URC follow that reasoning, it will be hard to convince them just by stating that Japan won Apex.

 

[zmx]

I agree, but my point still stands that its still too easy for them to counter, they just have to say:

-This is just one tournament, it doesn't prove that Japan has in fact a better metagame than U.S
-Japan has won with MK, which further proves that MK is broken and, therefore, should stay banned.

and since, in this case, most of the group of TOs that is the URC follow that reasoning, it will be hard to convince them just by stating that Japan won Apex.

The one tournament statement doesn't work here as it works for the poll. Allow me to explain lest you think I'm proposing a double standard. I now realize I worded that poorly. The poll was not advertised enough nor was it allowed enough time imo. And even if it was there's still the ad populum fallacy.

Apex however isn't just one tournament. It's the biggest smash tournament period. The biggest smash tournament that's ever occurred in history. It's been advertised longer and has been more hyped than any other tourny. Therefore, it accounts for a lot more than any regular national. What is more Japan beat out ALL of our top players using only SOME of their top players. I stress this because it shows how heavily the odds were in America's favor to win but they couldn't. It's a much bigger deal when you think about it.

An MK winning it is serves to further anti-ban's argument not pro-ban. The reason being that it was Japanese MKs and their region is all anti-ban. So if they don't feel the need to ban him what justification could we possibly have?

Lastly, Otori has lost to Nietono and 9b before both which are considered the best Japan players overall that don't main MK. In fact he's never gotten more than second before.

 

[M@v]

That poll wasnt very valid or accurate in the first place. Aside from that though, what about specific regions that didnt want MK banned? What if 70% of Arizona wanted him to remain legal, how were you accomodating them?

Regions were already taking a situation like this into their own hands. You don't HAVE to follow unity. Take Md/Va for example. Majority of their players wanted mk legal, so they planned to remain mk legal after apex, even before this new round of controversy started.

I also said its impossible to satisfy everyone, which is a fact of not just smash, but life in general.

 

[Omni]

but u gotta admit, Mav. the legitimacy of the URC is pretty flaky considering how things were done; not the end result

 

[Cassio]

Regions were already taking a situation like this into their own hands. You don't HAVE to follow unity. Take Md/Va for example. Majority of their players wanted mk legal, so they planned to remain mk legal after apex, even before this new round of controversy started.

I also said its impossible to satisfy everyone, which is a fact of not just smash, but life in general.

Why put regions in this situation in the first place? People shouldnt have to go against anything. You said you want to give the community what it wants, from what ive noticed over the years is that the community wants to hold tournaments using the rulesets they like without being looked down on. Why cant this be accommodated?

 

[zmx]

Now I'm hearing the argument of the Japanese/Asians simply being better at fighting games. Not only do I think this is absurd but it's an insult to every non-Asian player (that is to say any player not in those countries). Basically this implies that the rest of us are naturally stupid and couldn't ever hope to compete.

If they are better obviously it's because they put in the work and practice we don't. Claiming it's due to genetics has to be one of the worst Johns. I believe NA could be just as good if not better if they cared. And the first step is unbanning MK.

 

[Thino]

The one tournament statement doesn't work here as it works for the poll. Allow me to explain lest you think I'm proposing a double standard. I now realize I worded that poorly. The poll was not advertised enough nor was it allowed enough time imo. And even if it was there's still the ad populum fallacy.

Apex however isn't just one tournament. It's the biggest smash tournament period. The biggest smash tournament that's ever occurred in history. It's been advertised longer and has been more hyped than any other tourny. Therefore, it accounts for a lot more than any regular national. What is more Japan beat out ALL of our top players using only SOME of their top players. I stress this because it shows how heavily the odds were in America's favor to win but they couldn't. It's a much bigger deal when you think about it.

An MK winning it is serves to further anti-ban's argument not pro-ban. The reason being that it was Japanese MKs and their region is all anti-ban. So if they don't feel the need to ban him what justification could we possibly have?

Lastly, Otori has lost to Nietono and 9b before both which are considered the best Japan players overall that don't main MK. In fact he's never gotten more than second before.

We'll see what kind of importance they give to this Apex then, because despite the importance it has, I fear that they will minimize this result to justify their reasoning.

the ad populum problem still stands though, because in this context, as much of a double standard as it can sound, they(TOs) are trying to please the majority...of competitive players lol, and the problem with that when it comes to right or wrong that we're talking about an artificially created ruleset for a videogame.

I find it very very difficult to define what's right or wrong, and to be able to avoid this ad populum fallacy while debating about it.

also, there needs to be more polls

 

[JustBlind]

Does it matter? TOs banned MK cause they were tired of all the MKs in their tournaments because none top players are tired of it, so unless every tournament is gonna have those japanese players then there will still be floods of MKs until the meta game evolves to where ever Japan is, but obviously TOs don't want to wait for that and banning MK after ousting the opinions of the BBR is easier.

I mean, after you have confirmed that the japanese players are as good/better than US/EU players, you can start taking their tournament results into account for whether or not MK is broken without that stupid "they don't have good MKs" excuse, and the answer is obvious. But, again, not that it matters, at all. It was never about whether MK is broken at the top playing levels, ever.

Edit: Oh, of course I'm saying this implying every TO is going to go through with it, obviously that's not the case. Any TO that wants Japanese players will obviously not ban MK, but with a lot of top MKs thinking about quitting/not playing as seriously, it's not gonna be as fun to watch.

Which now that I think about it is gonna be awesome because with the lack of good MKs/practiced MKs whenever a Japanese player does come to a tournament in the west he wipe the floor with the MK players and make the ban look really stupid. Guess it's not all bad.

 

[Deleted member]

You're completely missing the point.

Smooth Criminal

Which point?

Mekos is making a case for MK's legality, saying it's healthier for competitive play. My argument is that MK being legal CLEARLY cuts down on character diversity in the scene, and diversity is, in my opinion, far more healthy for the competitive scene because it keeps it alive. Not everyone wants to drop their character to play MK.

 

[zmx]

Which point?

Mekos is making a case for MK's legality, saying it's healthier for competitive play. My argument is that MK being legal CLEARLY cuts down on character diversity in the scene, and diversity is, in my opinion, far more healthy for the competitive scene because it keeps it alive. Not everyone wants to drop their character to play MK.

You really didn't get the point? I'll explain then. Keep in mind this all has already been said.

Mekos states he's good as he is with his main today BECAUSE of MK being legal. Why? It forced him to get much, much better. It was the only way he'd be able to hold his own against top MKs and not drown in early brackets because of MK.

 

[Sorto]

You say this as if you think he was banned because "we don't like him". There's reasoning behind his ban, you know. You can't say I have a bad mentality because I'm only looking at what's healthiest for the American smash community.

There's a difference between the concept of a best character and a Broken character. This isn't Melee.

MKs ban is based on..

percentage of MONEY he takes in and popularity he has in US. Not proof of broken, just points to best.

No losing matchups. See pikachu in n64 if you want a comparison.

Ridiculous stall tactics and sudo stall tactics. Stalling is banned in all smash games. So more attempts should be made to counter this, since its just a stall tactic. Aka a strict LGL and scrooging rule perhaps. Perhaps look at Japans ruleset for guidance.

Strangely enough his ban is based on hatred. There is no proof of offensive brokeness by any means. Perhaps arguments for stalling brokeness exist. But then ics should be second bc they get a grab and can time you out with the infinite lol. If stalling isn't trying to be countered or anything.

Regardless of why he is banned. A better community came over and told us he is not ban worthy.

A community should not ban a character unless the character is banworthy. If you think he should be banned just to later be unbanned then you are crazy. Think of MK like a criminal, if there is a chance he is innocent you don't put him in jail to see if the crimes continue, you try to get evidence and make it stick. Right now, Japan alone is enough proof that MK is not overpowering. Just b/c of that chance he should not be banned. Its simple logic. The burden of proof should be on the proban side.

We are not at the TOP level of the metagame. And those who are higher then us say he should not be banned.

When we are at that level, if we as a community still think he is broken then banning is a viable option.

Its like taking a bunch of people who never played brawl and telling them top level tactics. Then you watch them play and for arguments sake DDD is just infiniting everyone because he is just getting easy sheild grabs. Every player will yell and scream about DDD or the chaingrab being banworthy. But ask any pro and you'll see that ddd is not even top tier.

 

[Thino]

Does it matter? TOs banned MK cause they were tired of all the MKs in their tournaments because none top players are tired of it

On a debating standpoint, it does matter because being tired of all the MK in tournament is not what I would call a very competitive reasoning.

Which point?

Mekos is making a case for MK's legality, saying it's healthier for competitive play. My argument is that MK being legal CLEARLY cuts down on character diversity in the scene, and diversity is, in my opinion, far more healthy for the competitive scene because it keeps it alive. Not everyone wants to drop their character to play MK.

The only reason diversity is taken in account in keeping the game alive is because a certain majority, that you happen to be part of, gives importance to it.

but WHAT is the reason why you give so much importance to diversity? is it because you consider that the only way to beat MK is to switch to MK?

That looks like an easy way out to deal with a situation to me, especially in a context of competitive play.

 

[Sorto]

I've said it before and I'll say it again; I'm here to give the best competitive ruleset people want as a whole(You can't make everyone happy sadly ). I personally don't mind mk as a player and I am perfectly fine playing in mk legal or mk banned events. Why did I vote to ban mk? There were a few reasons, including over centralization, but the one that swayed my vote more than anything else was the vote of YOU guys.

I never would of imagined 76% of voters(In a very large poll that had measures in place to prevent smurf accounts) would of voted so lop-sided to ban mk. The unofficial AiB poll had similar results, but I took those cautiously since smurf accounts could be used. That sends a really strong message.

In addition, the community is what sparked our discussion of mk's legality in the URC. People were starting to run MK banned tournaments as an experimental ruleset, and they started becoming more popular and common across the country.

I look at TOing like this. I'm the vendor. I'm here to sell my customers(tournament attendees) a product they want. In that case, this is a ruleset. My job is to offer a competitve ruleset my community wants. My community wanted a mk ban. So I gave it to them. If the community wants mk back and a much more limited stage list than we are used to here in the US, I would have no qualms giving it.

Your right with what you said and that's the problem.

Ethics and money do not always go hand and hand.

It is ethically wrong to ban a character who is not game breaking or overpowered. Japan has told us they do not think MK is banworthy. They have a more evolved metagame and know more about the game then us. This alone should lead the community to the decision that we can not "jump" to any conclusion about a ban b4 we reach that level, since we know that a higher level exists. But a TO will ban MK to get more/happier attendees. That is the flaw with the URC. They are almost all TOs they have a concentrated agenda and that's to increase sales and they do not care if it is ethical. Then they try to increase there control by giving special privilege to only URC tournies (it is actually written in its ruleset that only urc tournies can get stickied). The URC is one of the most disgusting things to happen to smash, honestly.

I mean logically think of any poll. The best character is this and x amount of players play this character. If people know they will have an easier time doing well without this character they will choose to ban him. Most people are not well informed on MK ban discussion, all they here is MK is broken and they choose to click ban as well. The poll is really a mediorce judge. Just like u said u cud go either way and you clicked ban. I think that is relatively common.

Perhaps Japans big secret to success is that there tournies are not for money. Who knows?

 

[Deleted member]

On a debating standpoint, it does matter because being tired of all the MK in tournament is not what I would call a very competitive reasoning.


The only reason diversity is taken in account in keeping the game alive is because a certain majority, that you happen to be part of, gives importance to it.

but WHAT is the reason why you give so much importance to diversity? is it because you consider that the only way to beat MK is to switch to MK?

That looks like an easy way out to deal with a situation to me, especially in a context of competitive play.

The more diverse a tournament is, the more character Matchups you'll encounter. Maybe M2K wouldn't have lost to Ocean if Rob mains were more common in tourneys, but they aren't. Same goes for everytime he loses to a character that isn't another MK, then starts claiming up and down that MK loses that matchup when the fact of the matter is he didn't know how to play it out.

 

[l!nk_aut]

I don't even see the big deal why it's such a big problem if MK is banned in the unity ruleset? It's TO's choice after all. Just don't use that ruleset.

I'm anti-ban and I'd rather have MK anti-banned by the ruleset though.
Anyways, I live in Europe. Dat ban can't touch me. lol.

 

[Sorto]

I don't even see the big deal why it's such a big problem if MK is banned in the unity ruleset? It's TO's choice after all. Just don't use that ruleset.

I'm anti-ban and I'd rather have MK anti-banned by the ruleset though.
Anyways, I live in Europe. Dat ban can't touch me. lol.

There ruleset is called official and they have special stickying priveledges b/c they help work on, moderate, or run smashboards.

They are like mafia of smash lol.

 

[M@v]

last time i checked only 2 URC people have any sort of mod/run smashboards, chibo and AZ. I wasnt in the URC before the sticky rule was initiated so i really cant touch on the topic because i wasnt there for it. Sorry :3

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Which point?

Mekos is making a case for MK's legality, saying it's healthier for competitive play. My argument is that MK being legal CLEARLY cuts down on character diversity in the scene, and diversity is, in my opinion, far more healthy for the competitive scene because it keeps it alive. Not everyone wants to drop their character to play MK.

Lack of diversity =/= gamebreaking.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Ussi]

I say we host both MK banned and legal tourneys and the one that gets more attendance we make standard.

 

[l!nk_aut]

Wasn't it something like that?
BBR votes on anti-ban -> few people make speshul ruleset committee -> make this ruleset "official" -> give privileges to enforce this.

I mean it's not that I want to get involved into this but this whole unity ruleset and those provileges seem very questionable to me. This ruleset isn't really a good thing.
Also: If you ban MK, other character's metagame may get stronger, yes, but where do you get the MK Matchup experience from? :D And if the japanese could handle it, why can't north america do it?

 

[Thino]

The more diverse a tournament is, the more character Matchups you'll encounter. Maybe M2K wouldn't have lost to Ocean if Rob mains were more common in tourneys, but they aren't. Same goes for everytime he loses to a character that isn't another MK, then starts claiming up and down that MK loses that matchup when the fact of the matter is he didn't know how to play it out.

And I find this awesome for the metagame, because M2K is prolly not the only MK main, that has very bad matchups against some characters

Destroys the theory of "Can't beat them? Join them" IMO

 

[Sorto]

I say we host both MK banned and legal tourneys and the one that gets more attendance we make standard.

Fairness and popularity are not equal.

 

[Steam]

Fairness and popularity are not equal.

For a TO it is. their goal is to get as many entrants as possible...

and if the ruleset is unfair less players will attend, simple as that

 

[Sorto]

For a TO it is. their goal is to get as many entrants as possible...

and if the ruleset is unfair less players will attend, simple as that

That is the goal of a TO.

But the goal of a community and a proper ruleset is to be fair.

And what you said is not true. More people will attend tournaments that favor them. Not based on fairness. Again different. And again off topic. Since this is more Apex related.

I played IC on long island at the start of brawl. I chaingrabbed players like will, anti, bum, and yadda. I was not a great player but I got a few decent rankings at local tournies then b/c of the chaingrab. Will and t/os he knew got the chaingrab practically banned in LI, because of me. Find old tourny posts, next to the ban it said sorry sorto. That lowered one or two ic attendees and gained a few that hated playing me or other IC and getting chaingrabbed. People support what favors them, not what is fair. You play nowadays is the IC infinite banworthy? You tell me? Did this lower attendance substantially? Not at all!

Ban something because it is gamebreaking not because you wanna make a few extra bucks.

 

[Steam]

That is the goal of a TO.

But the goal of a community and a proper ruleset is to be fair.

And what you said is not true. More people will attend tournaments that favor them. Not based on fairness. Again different. And again off topic. Since this is more Apex related.

I played IC on long island at the start of brawl. I chaingrabbed players like will, anti, bum, and yadda. I was not a great player but I got a few decent rankings at local tournies then b/c of the chaingrab. Will and t/os he knew got the chaingrab practically banned in LI, because of me. Find old tourny posts, next to the ban it said sorry sorto. That lowered one or two ic attendees and gained a few that hated playing me or other IC and getting chaingrabbed. People support what favors them, not what is fair. You play nowadays is the IC infinite banworthy? You tell me? Did this lower attendance substantially? Not at all!

Ban something because it is gamebreaking not because you wanna make a few extra bucks.

if a tournament is unfair, then the people it discriminates against won't go. if it's fair it's likely that everyone with interest will go.

the goal of a ruleset is to establish a set rules to suit the community. the goal of a community is to grow. AKA have as many people attend tournaments as possible.

 

[Cassio]

last time i checked only 2 URC people have any sort of mod/run smashboards, chibo and AZ. I wasnt in the URC before the sticky rule was initiated so i really cant touch on the topic because i wasnt there for it. Sorry :3

That doesnt prevent you from having a stance on the goals and objectives the URC ought to have. You acknowledged in your previous post that it shapes your perspective.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Dear steam: you missed the crucial part of my APEX predictions: "totally not regional bias". The part that shows it as sarcasm. Don't be a ****.

 

[Ussi]

Fairness and popularity are not equal.

LGL, case and point.

 

[Sorto]

if a tournament is unfair, then the people it discriminates against won't go. if it's fair it's likely that everyone with interest will go.

the goal of a ruleset is to establish a set rules to suit the community. the goal of a community is to grow. AKA have as many people attend tournaments as possible.

Read the end of my post. The IC chaingrab was banned in LI and its attendance remained. The IC chaingrab is NOT considered unfair. People go to tournies that favor them, within reason, not necessarily because they are fair.

There are MK players that voted to ban MK, but they still went to MK legal tournies. Your logic is flawed. A duh?

Im not saying you can make a ridiculous ruleset. But if it is within reason and has an unfair rule or two it may impact tourny attendance positively not negatively.

Wobbling is generally banned in Melee. Though the ruleset guidelines by backroom does NOT ban it. If it was legal would IC be taking every tourny? No, probably not. They weren't in the past. They banned a not proved to be broken technique and if anything it has probably increased attendance. Ic are not more played then the total of all the other characters combined. Thus the loss due to IC not showing up would be less then the players who would possibly atttend because the rules favor them.

Now let's stick to Apex discussion and thoughts on MK if you please.

 

[Black Mantis]

Let the ban continue. In a few more months there will likely be enough support and empirical evidence to more clearly see what an MK-less environment looks like.

Just know it wouldn't look like this

 

[Steam]

Dear steam: you missed the crucial part of my APEX predictions: "totally not regional bias". The part that shows it as sarcasm. Don't be a ****.

you use sarcasm so much when you're trying to be serious I took you seriously.

I'm going to leave it as my sig.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

I'm pretty sure he believed that. He also thinks (or at least thought) that Marth might have a slight advantage against MK

 

[C.J.]

Technically, I don't think Leon, Mike, or Ramin lost to any MKs at Apex in tournament...

Marth still loses the MU.

 

[sneakytako]

3. From other posts I have read, it is my understanding that Japan does not think that MK is banworthy (again this is only heresay to me). I was curious if anyone does know the Japanese players thoughts on MK. I ask because it was my understanding that in the past Japans beliefs about MK were overlooked since our MKs outclasses there's. From Apex results, this does not seem to be the case.

As a translator at Apex I heard multiple people ask this question and there was a general consesus with the Japanese members and those they represented.

Japan would not copy an MK ban. They do not endorse the ban for two reasons:

1.) The biggest reason is the fact that many players have devoted many hours of practice to learning this character, an MK ban would turn people away from this game and would be rude to those who have devoted the time to learn this game.

2.) They do not believe that MK ban is necessary to balance the game. Although they agree that the US stagelist is a different situation, in Japan they do not feel like he is dominate enough to issue a ban. They feel that the feelings for the US ban comes from having too many stages that MK is dominate and open the game up to a campier game for MK.

I heard nientono saying how he hates playing MKs at delfino, even though it is generally a good stage for olimar. In that MU he feels that it always ends up MK sharking during the non-solid stage and stalling in the other transitions to keep the advantage. He feels that it is neither fun to play or fun to watch.

During the last apex they felt that US's MKs were further ahead in the metagame, it has become apparent that they have done their homework and stepped up their game. They wouldn't go so far as saying that their MKs are better than ours, but they have often said that they feel that their top players were on par with the US's top players, but the US has a larger pool of top players.

Now this is my own opinion, but taking everything that I have heard into account it seems that we are at a crossroads. While it is apparent that many people want change in the ruleset that MK ban has become less popular with the results of Apex. I feel we either have to ban MK, or we have to start aggressively banning stages. I would actually like to see the US using Japanese ruleset and seeing how that fares, the fact that Japan has a much smaller player pool but has very good top players seems evidence that they are doing something right. I'd love to see the unity ruleset have a complete overhaul, but until then I still agree that something has to be done.

 

[Mister Eric]

^
interesting

 

[Chuee]

Technically, I don't think Leon, Mike, or Ramin lost to any MKs at Apex...

Marth still loses the MU.

Maybe not in bracket, but I know Ramin and Leon lost sets to MK in MMs and Leon in the spot for the crew battle.

 

[Cygnet]

Just know it wouldn't look like this
http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/5167/unledjpf.png

What do you want it to look like? A bunch of equal bars?

Imagine a game where the winner is selected purely by random and everyone has an equal chance to win. Wouldn't THAT distribution look like a bunch of equal bars?

And a lot of people are saying that a MK ban will bring a lot more people to tournaments...

Remember Mikehaze's video? He said that there was an MK banned tournament in his area, and tons of people came the first time! However, the second time, MUCH less people came. (The suggestion is that they realized that an MK ban doesn't solve their problems.)

Not sure how well this applies, but Concentrate II was MK banned and there was an amazing turnout (57 singles entrants) and many awesome matches, but Concentrate III wasn't nearly as impressive (Not sure how many singles entrants, but AiB says 38 people planned to come). Similar to Mikehaze's case above?

 

[popsofctown]

It's strange to say this, but I think correct line of development would be for America to ban MK and for Japan not to do so.


The reason is that Japan has always had a tight stagelist since the game's release. (one I'd enjoy more, but it's to each his own). It's much more doubtful that MK will cross the line in that kind of environment. Liberal American stages not only give MK much stronger game 2 and 3s, but also add to the snowball effect of encouraging MK practice and development and discouraging a lot of characters that would give MK a broader range of foes to master. The Japanese Olimar is an excellent example. If you main Olimar in Japan, you get to fight Japanese MKs on FD and Smashville and don't have to put up with gettting dragged to Rainbow Cruise all the time. It's probably still 40 - 60 or 45-55 IMO, but you're getting way less deterred from playing the character, so you don't quit him. So Olimar is a part of the environment, MKs have to weaken their other MUs to learn how to beat Olimar, and there's solid Olimars challenging other characters in the cast too.

In America, you have a way worse shot against MK. Even if you have more MU knowledge, you still might lose because you have to learn a whole different character just to play on a liberal stage. So in many cases, you aren't playing Olimar in the first place. He's a pretty rare character stateside. So then all the MKs don't have to learn the Olimar matchup, there's not that many strong Olimars and if you face one you can use the free shark win to have good odds. So when a Japanese Olimar shows up in America it's like introducing diseases to the Native Americans, no resistances built up, total decimation.

Changing our stage list to the Japanese one because of MK isn't a proper solution, because it's a constructivist ban. Same goes for the timer. Same goes for LGL, which was left around in spite of the MK ban, which means our current ruleset is even worse than MK legal. It creates a treadmill effect for successful players to nip and tuck the rules of the game when they do too well with a character, so bans have to be discrete like removing the character entirely.

IMO, Japanese are right. Americans are wrong, because the actual reasoning behind the MK ban is super scrubby, (he's not banworthy with LGL in place, he's banworthy because LGL should be removed for being the most inappropriate rule in the history of smash). But they could be right if they just banned the character a year and a half after the game came out. So everyone could be right.

 

[Sylarius]

The reason is that Japan has always had a tight stagelist since the game's release. (one I'd enjoy more, but it's to each his own). It's much more doubtful that MK will cross the line in that kind of environment. Liberal American stages not only give MK much stronger game 2 and 3s, but also add to the snowball effect of encouraging MK practice and development and discouraging a lot of characters that would give MK a broader range of foes to master. The Japanese Olimar is an excellent example. If you main Olimar in Japan, you get to fight Japanese MKs on FD and Smashville and don't have to put up with gettting dragged to Rainbow Cruise all the time.

This.

I don't think MK deserves to be banned after all of this, although I used to be pro-ban. I still really hate fighting MK, especially because my characters are all countered by him (Well, every character except Pikachu is)

I'm more neutral now, although I think that either MK needs to be banned (1. Because he only goes even with himself & the stagelist just aids MK) or the stagelist needs to be changed.

MK is broken with the current stagelist, ESPECIALLY Rainbow Cruise and Brinstar, but also noticeably Delfino. Halberd is fine with me because of the smaller boundaries (MK is light) and the flat area of the stage.

 

[Ussi]

Concentrate III was the weekend before finals, thats why less people came. I planned to go, but shoot i had a final on monday.