Feelings on MK and the MK ban after Apex

[TheReflexWonder]

The stagelist or ruleset in general is not an opportunity for us to attempt to balance the game.

I was totally joking, heh.

It's not a bad level, though. Outside of some transformations promoting camping (and that's not a problem to me, since it doesn't last long), I don't see a problem.

 

[Sorto]

Squirtle's Jab Lock setups may not be reliable (though "reliable" is open to interpretation; Squirtle can cause it on an opponent who isn't on a platform), but he has more than most characters, and he can infinite the cast on any reasonably-flat stage when he lands it due to true pivot and Jab2.

What happens when the opponent di-es to the edge of the stage and forces themself to fall off, can his infinite continue then. Can he keep someone in his infinite forever without the help of a wall, because otherwise it is not truly infinite. IC chaingrab is truly infinite.

 

[Supreme Dirt]

Yes, he can keep someone in his infinite forever actually.

 

[Strong Badam]

I'd be fine with PS1 if the windmill wasn't so stupid in this game. The ledges aren't even that bad and only screw over bad players. Windmill just creates a Player vs. Stage vs. Player situation which shouldn't happen.

 

[DeLux]

*Writes post on why the IC CG is not an infinite

*gets told by Sorto ICs CGs are truly infinite

Mad

 

[TheReflexWonder]

What happens when the opponent di-es to the edge of the stage and forces themself to fall off, can his infinite continue then. Can he keep someone in his infinite forever without the help of a wall, because otherwise it is not truly infinite. IC chaingrab is truly infinite.

Yes. Initial dash -> true pivot Jab1 gets you behind an opponent who SDI's the maximum distance from you and has enough range to hit opponents who don't move anywhere.

 

[Sorto]

ICs CGs are technically not infinites on I've confirmed the 6 lightest characters in the game and Ness/Lucas.

Essentially what happens is that the game refreshes movement frame by frame. So in terms of geometry, people move a bit each frame to give the illusion of linear movement.

As knock back increases, the distance a person travels per frame increases to give the illusion of faster linear movement.

As the percent increases, there comes a point where in one frame the character will undergo knockback that is larger than the ICs grab range, thus making regrabbing impossible.

It's always possible to regrab someone using the standard P Bthrow > N Pivot Grab (which introduces tripping to make it non-infinite for all characters for one). However, Dthrow/Fthrow end at percents below 999 against the characters I mentioned. If someone can only use Bthrow to reliably CG, it's no longer a standing infinite and is a walking CG that will end due to stage length.

What percentages? And at these percentages what is the nonmash out time and top human level mashout time that an opponent would be forced to stay in the grab.


Also are they infinites on all/any of the characters you did not mention?

 

[Strong Badam]

Initial dash -> initial dash -> true pivot Jab1 would be an infinite if tripping didn't exist. I'd be impressed if you could get to 999 without tripping.

 

[DeLux]

If you consider the risk of tripping reasonable to call it infinite (as mentioned with the Bthrow Pivot Grab) then I believe they are infinite for the characters I did not mention

It varies from character to character on where Dthrow/Fthrow ends. By in large, Dthrow will end before Fthrow and the percents are usually between 500-999. I pointed this out to the URC and they had to redefine infinite to fit the 300 rule otherwise I was going to start CGing MK indefinitely to stall as MK can't be CG'd infinitely.

They all however are 0-deaths, just not infinite.

If you check the IC forum, Guest and I wrote an algorithm that calculates the mashing question. I don't have the spreadsheet on my work computer, so you'd have to look there.

 

[Sorto]

Yes. Initial dash -> true pivot Jab1 gets you behind an opponent who SDI's the maximum distance from you and has enough range to hit opponents who don't move anywhere.

Alright cool. Now since it exists do something so that it effects the metagame. It still like saying this can be done. But till it is consistently done its just "possible". The rule effects him but not really since he isn't being used in that way often.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

One initial dash, and you only do it every time you get near the stage's edge. My mistake. That said, Squirtle has one of the fastest walk speeds in the game, and I usually just get away with walk forward -> Jab1 -> Jab2 in order to get behind the opponent. That's usually what I do when I land a Jab lock, and it works just fine, though it's probably because people don't adequately SDI every single hit. That way, you don't even have to get into the business of tripping.

 

[Sorto]

*Writes post on why the IC CG is not an infinite

*gets told by Sorto ICs CGs are truly infinite

Mad

Hey sorry, this was before I read your post.

Also, out of curiousity, are there other extreme, frame perfect planks that are powerful and do exist in the limits of the game that you know of. I remember a backroomer adumbrudeos(don't know the spelling), mentioning pikachu had a solid plank if he abused a ledge mechanic that was similar to wolfs sideb ledge mechanic where he appears on the stage.

 

[DeLux]

It's all good, I usually write stuff like that for comedic effect more than anything lol

I'll ask Ambro in the lab next time I see him.

I was under the impression that only MK had a frame perfect plank option.

 

[Sorto]

I'll ask ambro in the lab next time I see him.

I was under the impression that only MK had a frame perfect plank option.

I heard it years ago. I remember him saying he wanted to perfect it to prove that planking was the problem in brawl, not MK.

 

[Strong Badam]

Pika can plank pretty well with U-air and scar the stage with Up-B and then attack with invincibility IIRC.

 

[Thino]

if MK's planking was the only one that is perfect frame-wise, why is there still a LGL after his ban?

 

[Sorto]

@MK perfect plank

How is it perfect exactly? He is not invicible for all the frames till the ledge regrab is he? So what makes it qualify as perfect?

 

[DeLux]

@ Thino - Because TO's consistently have tournaments with rulesets that feature an LGL

@Sorto - Name search DMG, Doctor Mario Guy, the bringer of MK planking frame testing.

 

[Sorto]

@ Thino - Because TO's consistently have tournaments with rulesets that feature an LGL

@Sorto - Name search DMG, Doctor Mario Guy, the bringer of MK planking frame testing.

I will. But I just wanted a quick answer.

Is he invincible the whole time?

Or is it called PERFECT for another reason?

Pretty much it the word perfect being thrown around a little bit.

 

[DMG]

I have been summoned

None shall live

 

[Sorto]

Also, if it is truly perfect then isn't it just a stall mechanism then? Stalling is Banned, yes?

 

[Thino]

@ Thino - Because TO's consistently have tournaments with rulesets that feature an LGL

Oh, so it is just out of habit

 

[DMG]

It's not perfect to the point that MK is completely invincible, as in IDC. What it originally meant was MK's options executed well give no/little room for the opponent to reasonably stop it. Somewhat recently you had the discovery/look at the metagame minute shield fall off option and they found out that he was vulnerable the frame that the second Uair would come out (Long story if you don't know the history of it all, I wasn't able to test how/if MK's invincibility would be affected on shield/PS or if someone could actually take advantage of it, I had made it clear that you COULD shield/PS and slide off but I didn't know MK's then affected invincibility frame data so it was a bit of a toss up til they came along and showed it had a sliver window.)


The term as it is used these days is a bit off from what the original thread was about. Still, I would argue that we should have something in place for MK's planking, whether it be at least a LGL, or strictly enforcing the no stalling rule. MK on the edge, without enforcing the no stalling rule or without a LGL/some kind of rule in place, makes the game extremely dumbed down and the game would revolve specifically around planking as MK and trying to do anything in your power to stop it. MK would be the overwhelming best character and would not have a single even MU and arguably going past soft countering the entire cast.

 

[Cassio]

I thought the general idea was that if anyone was trying to grab the edge more than X times, they were trying to stall and we don't like that? I mean why would Pika need double? Should IC's get double despite the fact that they aren't gonna be using the edge for planking anytime soon? Do tethers need more?

If Pikachu grabs the edge 30-35 (or whatever we put the LGL to), he shouldn't have a reason for this many grabs EVEN with his half timer. What are you doing, dropping down and using Upb over and over looking for a chance to go onstage? If that's the case, why not raise the LGL or remove it for anyone that sucks at planking? Doing character specific LGL's or rulings also means you do away with the notion that we need a universal LGL to keep the game moving, since you would have MK with his own, a few other characters with a standard/bigger one, and a LOT without one. Unless we're really gonna keep one on just in case you see a legendary match where a Falco has more than 60 LG's and found a way to successfully plank his balls off.


I don't mind doing individual LGL's and stuff, but you're gonna need a good case for raising LGL numbers. Pikachu having quick framedata off the edge is less of a reason to give him more than if he actually sucked at planking.

I agree with this. My point was that if you were going to make a specific one for MK then there are others more deserving of a specific lgl. Otherwise just use one standard lgl.

I'm still holding that seeing MK **** up the stages RC/Brin as bad as he did for 3.5 years straight gave us a really, REALLY bad impression of the two stages, leading us to believe that they're both janky stages, when in reality, they may not be.

I think this is a disconnection brinstar/RC advocates have with those against them. The hope is that people want these stages gone bc of MK, but major portions of the community dating back to melee have never been big fans of stages with high level interaction and would slash the stagelist even more if they could. Its a popular view in WC in particular.

 

[DMG]

The specific one for MK makes the game much more playable though. MK with a 20 LGL impacts the game more than Tethers getting 70 edge grabs. They aren't going to do **** regardless of whether they had a limit or no limit. Most character in this game will not change the game if they were allowed to endlessly plank. Falcon would still suck, Falco would change nothing, etc. MK getting his own LGL if it's better for the game is fine. I'd rather have a game where MK has a very low LGL, than trying to discern if some character that WON'T impact the game by planking needs a high low or non LGL ruling.

MK should have whatever LGL is needed to keep him from being stupid. Just about everyone else in the cast it doesn't frankly matter that much. If MK has a 20 LGL and everyone else has 35, that's fine. That makes more sense than everyone at 35, but Tethers at double or IC's at double. Or everyone at 20 and double for etc characters.

 

[Thino]

The specific one for MK makes the game much more playable though. MK with a 20 LGL impacts the game more than Tethers getting 70 edge grabs. They aren't going to do **** regardless of whether they had a limit or no limit. Most character in this game will not change the game if they were allowed to endlessly plank. Falcon would still suck, Falco would change nothing, etc. MK getting his own LGL if it's better for the game is fine. I'd rather have a game where MK has a very low LGL, than trying to discern if some character that WON'T impact the game by planking needs a high low or non LGL ruling.

MK should have whatever LGL is needed to keep him from being stupid. Just about everyone else in the cast it doesn't frankly matter that much. If MK has a 20 LGL and everyone else has 35, that's fine. That makes more sense than everyone at 35, but Tethers at double or IC's at double. Or everyone at 20 and double for etc characters.

How about just removing LGL altogether since MK is out of the picture now anyway since it doesnt matter that much with other characters?

 

[Cassio]

The specific one for MK makes the game much more playable though. MK with a 20 LGL impacts the game more than Tethers getting 70 edge grabs. They aren't going to do **** regardless of whether they had a limit or no limit. Most character in this game will not change the game if they were allowed to endlessly plank. Falcon would still suck, Falco would change nothing, etc. MK getting his own LGL if it's better for the game is fine. I'd rather have a game where MK has a very low LGL, than trying to discern if some character that WON'T impact the game by planking needs a high low or non LGL ruling.

MK should have whatever LGL is needed to keep him from being stupid. Just about everyone else in the cast it doesn't frankly matter that much. If MK has a 20 LGL and everyone else has 35, that's fine. That makes more sense than everyone at 35, but Tethers at double or IC's at double. Or everyone at 20 and double for etc characters.

Ok, then put everyone at MKs lgl if it doesnt make a difference whether they have 20 or 70. If it does make a difference, then pika needs twice the lgl.

 

[John12346]

Uh, Cassio, just to set the record straight, Pikachu's minimum time of holding onto the ledge is half(or something) of what normal characters have, which means he gets to abuse more invincibility frames since he can drop off the ledge quicker than anyone else.

He can hang onto the ledge just as long as every other character.

So, if anything, Pikachu should be argued to have a lower LGL due to being an effective planker, although he doesn't have broken planking or anything so even arguing for a lower one would be silly.

I think this is a disconnection brinstar/RC advocates have with those against them. The hope is that people want these stages gone bc of MK, but major portions of the community dating back to melee have never been big fans of stages with high level interaction and would slash the stagelist even more if they could. Its a popular view in WC in particular.

Maybe, but... I feel that we have more things to competitively gain from Brinstar/RC than Melee does. Remember, we're running on two different engines and all that, and Brawl characters have a much easier time navigating the stages than Melee characters do, so...

Look, I know that we of SWF argue for/against Brinstar/RC's legality not because of Metaknight, but rather based on stage qualities. We rock in that regard, but once again, I can't help but feel that public opinion from players outside of SWF is somewhat (last I checked, it was something like a 50/50 split or w/e) against Brinstar/RC because they have somewhat controversial features, such as acid, uneven designs, movement, and temporary walls/walkoffs, but then their impressions of the stages are made infinitely worse because virtually every match there had a Met-Nite being a complete ****** on the stages and all that, causing some serious adversity against the stages for no real good reason.

 

[Strong Badam]

Johnnumbers: The invincibility is based on (Time spent on ledge)+ a number. Same happens with Link in Melee. The amount of actionable invinciblity frames Pikachu has is the same, because the first bit of invincibility is tied to the ledgegrab action

 

[Cassio]

Pikachu
Invincibility Frames - 34
Ledge Grab Lag Frames - 12
Ledge Drop Frame - 14

Everyone else
Invincibility Frames - 46
Ledge Grab Lag Frames - 24
Ledge Drop Frame - 26

Tethers
Invincibility Frames - 23
Ledge Grab Lag Frames - 1
Ledge Drop Frame - 3

To take the same advantage as everyone else from releasing the ledge he needs to let go and regrab more frequently. Its not quite twice as much but its significantly more.

Also Im not necessarily saying its right brinstar/RC should be banned, only the common train of thought from those who wish for it to be isnt so mk-centric from what Ive seen.

 

[John12346]

Ah, my mistake about the planking, in that case. For some reason, I thought he had the same amount of invincibility frames as everyone else >___>;

As far as Brinstar/RC, I think it's more of a psychological/subconscious thing thing, crazy as it sounds.

Because, we see MK screwing around everyone he fights on those stages.
And then... we just get worried about the stages because of all of the things that COULD be done there, despite the fact only MK can do it(Others can too, but not to the extent of MK, no way).
And as a result, we think the stages are just janky and shouldn't be legal, citing that sharking and extreme stalling are possible on the stages as ban criteria, but only because we see MK do it so many times and no one can seem to beat it.
Sure, we also cite the uneven terrain/acid/movement/temporary walls and walkoffs, but there's nothing really too awful about that stuff, but we include it anyway as a part of the MK-inflicted subconscious prejudice of the two stages.

I know it sounds silly, but hey, it's an interesting way to look at things, I think.

Oh, and by we, I don't mean us, I mean the less educated people who don't really cruise these boards on SWF, and think Brisntar/RC should be banned.

 

[DeLux]

I think Brinstar should be banned >_>

I am uneducated !!!

 

[DMG]

Ok, then put everyone at MKs lgl if it doesnt make a difference whether they have 20 or 70. If it does make a difference, then pika needs twice the lgl.

Except the LGL you need to put MK on might be lower than what other characters are comfortable with. Most characters are fine on the edge, and if we apply a LGL that's too low because of MK, that could easily hurt them. Olimar isn't gonna break the game anytime soon if we take off a LGL, but if the LGL was half the current amount, it could negatively affect him and plenty of other characters. THAT was the point: put whatever LGL you need on MK to keep him reasonable, and leave the other characters out of it because using the same LGL that he truly needs is gonna spell trouble for them. The rest of the cast should not have to deal with the same strict burden than MK should, so if you want a LGL for the rest of the cast ideally it would be higher. The most important thing is to get MK's number/limits right. If we can do that while also giving other reasonable characters breathing room, I say do that instead of universally mandating how other character can play, who will never reach MK's potential, by using a MK quality limit on them.

 

[Sorto]

So with MK banned, remove the plank limit. The reasons for keeping go back to agreeing that planking is broken. And watch the stall fests ensue. Planking and stalling is the problem, not mk. Its just that mks is the best at abusing the problem. With a proper LGL, Mks stalling ability could be severly hindered.

 

[Steam]

Then ban G&W's hammer because the 9 doesn't give ample warning. Or dashing because tripping doesn't give ample warning. "But storng bard those are character things and we can't ban those!" Meta Knight

things like turnips and GW sideB are calculated risks a player can choose to take. it's not like pictochat for example where spikes can spawn into you randomly with no warning and you take damage. and regardless you still have to actually get hit by the move for those character differences to matter. these aren't massive random effects that suddenly have a huge impact on the match (anything that happens on picto) they are things that can be controlled by the players.

tripping I completely agree with but there's no good way to deal with it... so we just have to put up with it.

 

[Krystedez]

I think Brinstar should be banned >_>

I am uneducated !!!

Well, I'd say you are just fine.


If you think Brinstar should be banned with MK legal.

But in any case, I like Brinstar, it gives my two mains some effective counterpicking ability ( and ) Same with RC, but I agree it's more janky and allows for stalling and weird stuff to happen more often.

 

[DeLux]

@ Steam: Given that Picto Chat is a CP, it's a players calculated risk that they can choose to take by selecting the level and its random nature.

@ Krystedez: I would remove a slew of stages from the legal stage list before even considering RC.

 

[Krystedez]

Tripping: Don't run
Pictochat: Pay attention and stay in safe zones, it's not that hard
Hammer: You see it wind up, that's enough indication that you have a chance of getting one-hit KO'd. GTFO.

Come on people.

Which stages DeLux? I'm not disagreeing. I think Brinstar is better than RC tho.

 

[DeLux]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=295747

Sums up my thoughts (although I've since deviated slightly in ideology, but not THAT much ie YIB and Frigate are definitely questionable)

 

[Cassio]

Except the LGL you need to put MK on might be lower than what other characters are comfortable with. Most characters are fine on the edge, and if we apply a LGL that's too low because of MK, that could easily hurt them.

vs.

Except the LGL you need to put the cast might be lower than what pikachu is comfortable with. Pikachu is fine on the edge, and if we apply a LGL that's too low because of the rest of the cast, that could easily hurt him.

Id finish the post but you get the idea. Pikachu is hurt by having the same lgl as the rest of the cast. The only way this isnt the case is if you remove the lgl altogether or make it so high that its essentially irrelevant. Its a matter of consistency. If were going to be worried about what characters are or arent hurt by a universal lgl, then pikachus lgl should be higher along with MK's lower one. If were not going to worry about this then everyone should have the same lgl.

Sure, we also cite the uneven terrain/acid/movement/temporary walls and walkoffs, but there's nothing really too awful about that stuff, but we include it anyway as a part of the MK-inflicted subconscious prejudice of the two stages.

Its a matter of perspective. While I agree, to many people these qualities in a stage are unforgivable, lol.