Feelings on MK and the MK ban after Apex

[Spelt]

It's omni.


He's probably gonna infract me for this post.

 

[Omni]

Whatever do you guys mean.

 

[WindMajor]

I wanted to infract Omni so bad, but he's too Super.

 

[Sorto]

Lol @ this fail thread.

Are people seriously unable to differentiate between MKs legality on certain stages, and the ACTUAL problem, which is far too many people using him as the easy way to free money, absolutely flooding the scene with MK and pulling out bull**** CP stages to try and win some cash?

If MK was 10x better than the next best character or 1.01x better, he would be *****d the same and people would use him to counter every matchup, regardless of how much it is in his favour. The problem is and always has been, peoples approach to 'competition' in which they will do everything to maximise every 1% chance they have of winning which might be all it takes, to main MK.

But hey, if you guys enjoy seeing MK dittos non stop on stream and facing the same stock-standard ban/counterpick scenario every match to prevent MK's getting a huge advantage on you, go ahead. Dont know why youre so keen to make the game **** for yourself. Clearly your obsession with being the best at competition, meant **** all vs people who dont play for money and use a variety of characters, so go figure that one out lol.

Heres me hoping the URC will have some guts and stick to their guns, a last-minute cry of desperation from anti-ban was inevitable, dont let it break your resolve now.

--

Seriously, I can not comprehend what the problem with a temporary ban is. What the hell is the harm in trialling it? Whats the worst thats gonna happen, mk mains wont be able to afford a new video game for a month? seriously -_-

Games have best characters all the time. Sometimes that best character is alone at the top.

Being the best character is NOT equal to being banworthy.

People want to ban metaknight because the community overuses him, not because he is unfair. That's absolutely ridiculous.

Pikachu is the best character in 64. With no losing matchups and stages like dreamland where he dominates on. It is without a doubt optimal to learn to play as pikachu. This happens more often then you seem to believe.

A community that is better than or at the very least equal to ours came over and told us they don't think mk is banworthy. They made mk legality work and this proves that at higher levels or at the very least equal level metagame to ours that an mk legal ruleset can be completely competitive and even lead to competitive non mk characters being played.

A character ban should be a LAST resort. And he should be proven to be so damaging and unfair without a question of a doubt. If Japan made it work and is at they level they are at then it is very possible to make it work. And thats enough proof that it should make any proban stop and rethink. If they are not stopped or rethinking it does not speak to the results of Apex, it speaks to people being so stuck to a resolve and an agenda that they don't even review evidence.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

You don't see any of the Japanese losing to random midtiers.

Mostly because Meta Knight doesn't lose to random mid tiers. Kakera sure didn't go ICs against me.

 

[Omni]

MK doesn't lose to random mid tiers?

- See Tyrant vs. Fow
- See DSF vs. Speed
- See M2K vs. ROB
- See Seibrik vs. Speed
- See like every MLG MK vs. Espy and X.

My argument (since you took one line out of context) is that the Japanese players didn't lose to novelty which is what people believe Ocean represents. The argument, "There are no good ROBs in the US," doesn't fly when you realize the same is true if we're talking about Pikachu, Marth, Ness, Kirby, etc.

Quite literally, Mew2King is or was the best Brawl player in the US. "Don't know the match-up" johns are not an excuse for a top level player of his calibur.

 

[zmx]

I'm waiting for M2K to lose to Ganon so people can John that he didn't know the MU.

 

[Ghostbone]

People want to ban metaknight because the community overuses him, not because he is unfair. That's absolutely ridiculous.

It's really a matter of opinion.
I still think that if 76% of a community wants something banned, it's better to ban it then keep it legal, it's just such an overwhelming majority, and why would you cater to the 24% rather than the 76%?

A community that is better than or at the very least equal to ours came over and told us they don't think mk is banworthy. They made mk legality work and this proves that at higher levels or at the very least equal level metagame to ours that an mk legal ruleset can be completely competitive and even lead to competitive non mk characters being played.

It shows that MK being legal works in their metagame.
For whatever reason MK isn't working well in the US metagame. Whether that's because of MK being overpowered, players lacking the drive to improve because of him or him preventing significant metagame growth of other characters.

A character ban should be a LAST resort. And he should be proven to be so damaging and unfair without a question of a doubt. If Japan made it work and is at they level they are at then it is very possible to make it work. And thats enough proof that it should make any proban stop and rethink. If they are not stopped or rethinking it does not speak to the results of Apex, it speaks to people being so stuck to a resolve and an agenda that they don't even review evidence.

Apex results are certainly interesting, but it's still only one tournament, and that shouldn't override all previous data that's been collected.

 

[zmx]

"I still think that if 76% of a community wants something banned, it's better to ban it then keep it legal, it's just such an overwhelming majority, and why would you cater to the 24% rather than the 76%?"

One poll was conducted. What is more, obviously people that cared about change were more willing to vote (I personally didn't even know a poll was even going on) rather than people that were content with the norm. Several polls should be conducted and they should actually be advertised all over the site especially now after Apex.

However either way, the majority always being right is a logical fallacy. The majority of smash players (casuals) don't think smash is a competitive game, does that make them right?

The only basis used to make a decision should be valid justifications. "Because the majority says so" is not a valid justification. There has to be more to it than that.

 

[Omni]

It's really a matter of opinion.
I still think that if 76% of a community wants something banned, it's better to ban it then keep it legal, it's just such an overwhelming majority, and why would you cater to the 24% rather than the 76%?

Classic Appeal to the Masses Fallacy.

It shows that MK being legal works in their metagame.
For whatever reason MK isn't working well in the US metagame. Whether that's because of MK being overpowered, players lacking the drive to improve because of him or him preventing significant metagame growth of other characters.

Apex results are certainly interesting, but it's still only one tournament, and that shouldn't override all previous data that's been collected.

We are playing the same game, Ghostbone. Literally the only "metagame difference" is the stagelist. Why wouldn't we focus on removing stages like RC/Frigate/Brinstar/Delfino as opposed to removing a character from the cast? Are the value of those 4 stages worth more the influence of a strong character slot? The only reason why MK wasn't working in our metagame was because of stages like Brinstar/RC still being legal.

Apex is an International Tournament that shoulders a lot of weight. It brings the best of the best in the world. And it is the most up-to-date review on how we stand. Saying Apex is "only one tournament" is like saying Evo is "only one tournament". That isn't the case.

 

[infiniteV115]

Apex 2009 - Ally (Snake only at the time) wins, top player from NA
Apex 2010 - DEHF (Falco only at the time) wins, top player from NA
Apex 2012 - Otori wins (MK only at this tourney), top player from Japan

 

[John12346]

From all of the arguments I've heard, and all the **** that has gone down, this is how I believe everything plays into the scenario of MK getting banned. Note that I'm going to ignore Apex's results for now because I'm explaining my best interpretation of why MK got banned, not why he should remain banned(which is a different story, and needs to be covered by different topics). This is mostly a recap of everything that we know already, but I don't think enough people are informed, since all of the public info we've got is scattered around everywhere. Most of the info that I came up with here was derived from that old Meta Knight ban group(check the second page of threads, that's where the good stuff is) back when the idea of trying to get MK banned for the second time was still fresh and all that.

Also gonna collapse it, because it's a lot of text, but please, read it at least once if you're not 100% certain about what led up to the ban.

Spoiler

Based on all of the arguments that have taken place, I would have to say that the "surgical nerf" argument is what pushes MK over the edge in being ban criteria. Unrestricted, MK breaks the game via a non-infinite strategy(infinite strategies are fair game to be banned/limited), planking, and must be restricted with his blatantly lowered 35 ledge grab limit. I've been prattling this point on and on again, but if a character needs rules to keep him in line with what would otherwise be dictated as normal, unaltered gameplay(50 ledge grab limit), then the character is obviously breaking the game and usually needs to be banned, because attempting to nerf him is, in a lot of people's eyes, dancing around the issue instead of attacking it directly.

Plus, we've seen how, here on the boards, people have suggested alternate ways to nerf MK rather than flat out ban him, such as huge restrictions of the stagelist, a larger timer(which is an alright idea, but people are putting it forth solely because of MK), an even LOWER LGL for MK, a scrooging limit, and that crazy air time limit that was suggested some time ago. To some, it looks like a way to keep MK in the game. To me, and probably a lot of other pro-ban people, it says that anti-ban is admitting that MK is unbeatable under normal, unrestricted gameplay, and needs be nerfed further in order to keep him in line with the rest of the cast.

This is also where Grim's double standard argument comes in. If we're going to be nerfing the most powerful character in the game, why don't we buff Ganon by giving him Punch Time or something? We could give every character an arbitrary series of buffs and nerfs in order to balance the entire game to a bunch of 0 matchups, but who the hell would want to play a game that came with a rulebook the size of an Oxford Dictionary?

In addition to that, the fact that MK has an amazing moveset, is the best character in the game, has had his own tier for quite some time now, has no bad matchups and arguably no evens, has won upside ~45% of all tournament money, and above half from regionals and nationals only, how he generally kills hype when he wins/grand finals is MK dittos, etc. etc. etc. is merely icing on the cake, and should not be taken as a ban criteria all on it's own, but it doesn't help MK's case in the slightest, having (SSF4AE Yun/SF3S Chun/*insert other OP fighting game characters here*) status in addition to breaking the game, as stated earlier.

This next part is just guesswork, since I'm not actually in the URC, but it serves to reason that they likely knew all of the "reasons" why pro-ban AND anti-ban felt the ban was or wasn't justified, and they likely took the poll, perhaps because the URC does value the community pretty highly, as the final measure to see if MK should ultimately be banned in the states.

I can't say for sure what their true intentions were, because I'm not in the URC, but this is a probable enough explanation.

Most tourneygoing users who don't frequent Metagame and Ruleset have not read all of these arguments and know them down to the finest detail, but they do understand most of the arguments despite not reading them because they have been able to experience most of these things, either through playing themselves, or watching other matches with Meta Knight ******ry. Because of this, about 3/4 of the community voted for the ultimate ban of MK, because they were fed up with all of the above stated nonsense that's been going on for 3 years.

It should also be enough reason for this case of a poll to avert the argumentum ad populum fallacy counterargument, as well. Most tournament goers knew the reasons why MK should or shouldn't have been banned, because most should have had first hand experience with all of their "reasons" for or against the ban in the first place.

Just as a reminder, this is to explain what I believe what ultimately led up to the URC's decision to ban MK, and NOT why he should remain banned, as that is an entirely different argument.

It also should serve as enough reasoning for this case to avoid the argumentum ad populum fallacy, as well, I think.

 

[TheReflexWonder]

MK doesn't lose to random mid tiers?

- See Tyrant vs. Fow
- See DSF vs. Speed
- See M2K vs. ROB
- See Seibrik vs. Speed
- See like every MLG MK vs. Espy and X.

My argument (since you took one line out of context) is that the Japanese players didn't lose to novelty which is what people believe Ocean represents. The argument, "There are no good ROBs in the US," doesn't fly when you realize the same is true if we're talking about Pikachu, Marth, Ness, Kirby, etc.

Quite literally, Mew2King is or was the best Brawl player in the US. "Don't know the match-up" johns are not an excuse for a top level player of his calibur.

An isolated incident doesn't mean much. People aren't infallible, of course. Watch any MK these days take knowledge of how to efficiently wall Ness and abuse the grab release; Meta Knight just shouldn't lose. Based on your list, Sonic appears to have a decent matchup against Meta Knight, and that's fine. There is more than enough evidence to suggest that Sonic can hold his own, but, say, ROB or Ness? Not so much.

I'm not trying to make excuses for M2K. From what I can tell, he has serious weaknesses as a player.

 

[Omni]

I was just responding to your statement above. MK can lose to midtiers.

M2K knew Ocean was coming and was not prepared.
Otori knew Esam was coming and was prepared.

I'm also refuting to the statements mainly shot toward M2K about him not knowing the match-up. That's a silly excuse; since when did people start johning for other players?

 

[infiniteV115]

People always john for a top player when that player doesn't perform well/gets outplayed/loses a battle that they were expected to win.

 

[Nicholas1024]

@Omni
Well, people that (I think?) know the matchup have come out and said M2K wasn't playing it correctly. Sure, he's a top player, but that doesn't make him infallible.

Also, would it be possible to do what some poster suggested and make a poll on whether people still support the MK ban after APEX? (Preferably with a "temp ban" option added.) It might be instructive to see what the community as a whole thinks.

 

[zmx]

I've read the argument and I'm not impressed John. Now allow me to refute every single bit of it:

"Based on all of the arguments that have taken place, I would have to say that the "surgical nerf" argument is what pushes MK over the edge in being ban criteria. Unrestricted, MK breaks the game via a non-infinite strategy(infinite strategies are fair game to be banned/limited), planking, and must be restricted with his blatantly lowered 35 ledge grab limit. I've been prattling this point on and on again, but if a character needs rules to keep him in line with what would otherwise be dictated as normal, unaltered gameplay(50 ledge grab limit), then the character is obviously breaking the game and usually needs to be banned, because attempting to nerf him is, in a lot of people's eyes, dancing around the issue instead of attacking it directly."

Those stages many believe (as this very topic suggests) shouldn't be legal anyways with or without MK. A stage shouldn't decide who wins, player skill should decide this. Otherwise the whole purpose of a tournament and proper seeding is lost. So saying with MK we lose these stages is absurd, they are laughable for competitive play in the first place. A Ness that put in so much work to beat DDD shouldn't
lose to one mistake by getting grabbed on delphino/Castle seige.

Other characters have strong planking games. Hence why we have a limit for every character. So by that logic since we've imposed surgical limits on every character, they ALL should be banned as according to you we've "admitted" they are broken under normal gameplay. Planking isn't unbeatable in the first place but that's another topic all together.

The same could be said for pretty much all other "surgical limits" air planking/scrooging etc. Other characters like Pit can do it yet we don't ban them.

What is more, by the nature of tournys, by taking items off, we are already imposing surgical limits on EVERY character.

"This is also where Grim's double standard argument comes in. If we're going to be nerfing the most powerful character in the game, why don't we buff Ganon by giving him Punch Time or something? We could give every character an arbitrary series of buffs and nerfs in order to balance the entire game to a bunch of 0 matchups, but who the hell would want to play a game that came with a rulebook the size of an Oxford Dictionary?"

This is refuted by my earlier point. Every character is already nerfed for tourny play since items are off where characters like Peach would certainly be miles better with them on. Ganon in particular has an amazing glide toss. So please don't act as if any of this is MK specific. It's not. There is no double standard here.

"In addition to that, the fact that MK has an amazing moveset, is the best character in the game, has had his own tier for quite some time now, has no bad matchups and arguably no evens, has won upside ~45% of all tournament money, and above half from regionals and nationals only, how he generally kills hype when he wins/grand finals is MK dittos, etc. etc. etc. is merely icing on the cake, and should not be taken as a ban criteria all on it's own, but it doesn't help MK's case in the slightest, having (SSF4AE Yun/SF3S Chun/*insert other OP fighting game characters here*) status in addition to breaking the game, as stated earlier."

Mikehaze refuted the point about MK winning 45% of tourny money. This is extremely misleading I urge people to watch his video. And the best character having an amazing move-set? Who could have guessed.

Also MK has weaknesses as well, everyone seems to forget about. He has no projectiles. He's one of the lightest characters in the game. He's subject to grab release-death by several characters. All these things you gloss over when talking about how great he is.

"This next part is just guesswork, since I'm not actually in the URC, but it serves to reason that they likely knew all of the "reasons" why pro-ban AND anti-ban felt the ban was or wasn't justified, and they likely took the poll, perhaps because the URC does value the community pretty highly, as the final measure to see if MK should ultimately be banned in the states."

All speculation and thus I have no need to refute any of this.

"Most tourneygoing users who don't frequent Metagame and Ruleset have not read all of these arguments and know them down to the finest detail, but they do understand most of the arguments despite not reading them because they have been able to experience most of these things, either through playing themselves, or watching other matches with Meta Knight ******ry. Because of this, about 3/4 of the community voted for the ultimate ban of MK, because they were fed up with all of the above stated nonsense that's been going on for 3 years."

Appeal to the masses fallacy again. I thought you said this isn't what this argument was about John?

"It should also be enough reason for this case of a poll to avert the argumentum ad populum fallacy counterargument, as well. Most tournament goers knew the reasons why MK should or shouldn't have been banned, because most should have had first hand experience with all of the "reasons" for or against the ban in the first place."

Pure speculation again.
But a bit of common sense should tell you that people tend to John a lot here when they lose. Where were all these amazing players being held back by MK at MK banned tournys like Concentrate? Oh wait a minute, it was nearly all the same people doing well.

I've read your argument, I have refuted your points. Thus, I still say the ban was not justified then and it sure as heck isn't justified now.

 

[ShadowLink84]

snip

I already said this, no need to re-iterate it.

It is my understanding that a character ban should be an almost last resort. In the past it had been argued that MK is being banned because no other realistic solution exists.

No.
The primary issue with MetaKnight is that he does have a broken aspect to him which reduces the competitiveness of the game significantly, primarily, his ledge game.

Many attempts were placed on a global scale to hinder his ledge gameplay; let's not lie and say its ledge grabbing as a whole either; but they still cold not hinder it due to his capabilities to avoid the ledge grab limit entirely.

Let alone that there were many, many, many issues with the lgl as well.
This, compupld with many different changes and suggestions concerning the ruleset concerning the character was a clear indication that the character was causing problems.

Considering this continued for over 3 years, and his dominance only increased, provided an indication that banning the character was more likely the best solution, rather tha continously creating strife within the gaming community with faulty rule sets.

After all, the ones who only truly endorsed the terrible LGL idea were staunchly anti-ban and had made it clear they had no desire to change their stance.

Japan with a greater or at the very least equal metagame made MK work and not be overpowered as a character.

Thus it is possible for MK to not be banworthy in a completely competitive metagame that is at or beyond our current level.

Except that the Japanese players beat their own Japanese players at the end using MetaKnight.

So the number one player who is Japanese, beat his fellow Japanese player's, using MetaKnight. See the problem? You're essentially trying to draw an anti-ban conclusion, despite the fact that it is still MetaKnight who won.

The logic is too great of a stretch because your argument can be used against you.
You say the japanese have an advanced metagame and in their country he doesn't dominate, but then again, they came to what is equivalent to a world class tournament and won with MetaKnight.

See the problem? It's a dual edged argument.


Let alone that there is no method of proving flat out that the Japanese are far ahead in the metagame based off one tournament, especially as their ruleset is different from our own.
It isn't the case with MvC2 where the United States dominated the Japanese more often than once a year.

This would lead me to believe that a FAIR community would try to emulate this instead of jumping to a character ban.

No.
FOr one, the issue in itself has been discussed for over three years.
So I would appreciate it if you did not insinuate the community has being so quick to jump for a ban, when it has been very, very conservative in terms of its views on stages and characters.

Perhaps emulate/ work off of Japans ideas.
1) Longer Timer- Japan uses 10 min from my understanding. But U.S. could try 9 if they fear 10 would lengthen too many tournies.
2) Lower stage choices- Japan uses 3 from my understanding. But U.S. could try removing more questionable stages instead of jumping directly to 3.

What would the longer time do exactly?
In fact, what would be the point in changing the timer?
In fact, why are we changing the ruleset for the sake of ONE character.
You do not enact global changes for a single character.
That was part of the problem for the last three years in the first place.
For three years, people searched for an answer to metaKnight.

This went from characters, to the extreme case of the LGL and yet it was still an issue.


You can't simply say "oh hey guys look, Apex, a Japanese MetaKnight won, but they don't ban MetaKnight, clearly, this means we are behind in the metagame and that MetaKnight is perfectly legal! After all, in their tournaments he doesn't dominate!"

When you look at such an argument with no prior knowledge on the issue, it makes one ask, "Are you that desperate to have MetaKnight legal that you would use such a bizarre argument?"

No one has solved the issue regarding the ledge problem by the way. I've been waiting for a very, very long time and still no answer.

I've read the argument and I'm not impressed John. Now allow me to refute every single bit of it:

Oh christ...

Those stages many believe (as this very topic suggests) shouldn't be legal anyways with or without MK. [/quote]
Primarily because many of those individual's simply do not like the stages.
Those stages are perfectly fine to play on without MetaKnight dominating them.
there has been noa rgument made against them outside of MetaKnight being legal.

A stage shouldn't decide who wins, player skill should decide this.

It does. Nothing has been shown that Brinstar and RC have such ane ffect on gameplay as to make skill less important.

Otherwise the whole purpose of a tournament and proper seeding is lost. So saying with MK we lose these stages is absurd, they are laughable for competitive play in the first place. A Ness that put in so much work to beat DDD shouldn't
lose to one mistake by getting grabbed on delphino/Castle seige.

Ness is a bad character.
this entire statement sounds like on big QQ over the stage and over the hard work that's done by the under dog character.
They are an underdog for a reason.

Other characters have strong planking games. Hence why we have a limit for every character. So by that logic since we've imposed surgical limits on every character, they ALL should be banned as according to you we've "admitted" they are broken under normal gameplay. Planking isn't unbeatable in the first place but that's another topic all together.

Name them.
I dare you to cite DK vs Olimar.
Or to cite G&W.
In fact, placing a global rule insinuates that there is a global problem.
Planking is not a global problem.
Ergo, it shouldn't be global.
Furthermore many of the power planking games are matchup specific and the result of a character's inherent flaws.

The same could be said for pretty much all other "surgical limits" air planking/scrooging etc. Other characters like Pit can do it yet we don't ban them.

If Pit is gliding under the stage, its not an issue. Pit has many flaws and can be countered.
When MetaKnight does it, there is a difference.
Just because a character is capable of doing something, does not insinuate the tactic in itself is broken.
Many character's can rush under the stage, doesn't mean they aren't terribly vlnerable doing so.

What is more, by the nature of tournys, by taking items off, we are already imposing surgical limits on EVERY character.

The behavior of items is an uncontrollable random.
Thusly they are shut off to prevent the loss of skill as a requirement in a tournament.
There is a difference between banning items and then trying to limit grabbing the ledge which is a basic part of gameplay.

This is refuted by my earlier point. Every character is already nerfed for tourny play since items are off where characters like Peach would certainly be miles better with them on. Ganon in particular has an amazing glide toss. So please don't act as if any of this is MK specific. It's not. There is no double standard here.

It isn't refuted at all.
The behavior of items as well as the fact that some of them provide an extreme advantage to character's resulted in them being banned.
Unless of course you believe we should play with smash balls.

Mikehaze refuted the point about MK winning 45% of tourny money. This is extremely misleading I urge people to watch his video. And the best character having an amazing move-set? Who could have guessed.

Provide the exact quote and provide the data that contradicts the year's worth of data that john collected.

Also MK has weaknesses as well, everyone seems to forget about. He has no projectiles. He's one of the lightest characters in the game. He's subject to grab release-death by several characters. All these things you gloss over when talking about how great he is.

Falco cannot counter planking very well.
Falco doesn't have great air speed.
Falco cannot change direction in the air easily.

It's easy to cite weaknesses and then ignore the strengths that make up for them.
You might as well try and say that Wario loses to Ganon due to being death grabbed.

All speculation and thus I have no need to refute any of this.

He admitted it was speculation.
Sooo moot point.

Appeal to the masses fallacy again. I thought you said this isn't what this argument was about John?

If a million people notice you've been bickering about MetaKnight and have been editing the ruleset to counter MetaKnight, and still failt o dos o, I imagine the feelings regarding the character would indeed support pro-ban, which was his point.

I've read your argument, I have refuted your points. Thus, I still say the ban was not justified then and it sure as heck isn't justified now.

And I refuted yours.
I ignored parts I agreed upon/did not need to address

 

[zmx]

"After all, the ones who only truly endorsed the terrible LGL idea were staunchly anti-ban and had made it clear they had no desire to change their stance."

The LGL is a terrible idea? So is the 50 grab limit a terrible idea too? I guess every person that thinks there should be a LGL at all is anti-every character ban. Because there's apparently something wrong with that.

 

[Kewkky]

How about anti-ban collects some data proving MK is not banworthy, then comes back and make their case?

Looks like the shoe is on the other foot now.

 

[zmx]

You want a solution to the problem? Learn to deal with planking. Has anyone done this? Probably not. But that doesn't mean it's impossible. I remember reading on here that you can in fact foot stool MK while he's planking. If someone could master this, this seems like a very effective counter every character could utilize. Of course if it is true it would still no doubt take a lot of practice. But I think it's high-time we stop Johning and start getting better.

 

[fkacyan]

How about anti-ban collects some data proving MK is not banworthy, then comes back and make their case?

Looks like the shoe is on the other foot now.

The fact that people still throw around the "banworthy" buzzword like there's some global criteria already decided upon is hilarious.

Also, OVERSWARM ROB BEATS MK CLEARLY YOURE BAD

 

[zmx]

How about anti-ban collects some data proving MK is not banworthy, then comes back and make their case?

Looks like the is on the other foot now.

In all seriousness Anti-ban doesn't need to. The data presented for pro-ban is already enough proof. Again watch MikeHaze's second video on the matter.

 

[ShadowLink84]

You want a solution to the problem? Learn to deal with planking. Has anyone done this? Probably not. But that doesn't mean it's impossible. I remember reading on here that you can in fact foot stool MK while he's planking. If someone could master this, this seems like a very effective counter every character could utilize. Of course if it is true it would still no doubt take a lot of practice. But I think it's high-time we stop Johning and start getting better.

The whole "Quit QQing and get better argument" didn't work for the past 3 years and it won't work now.

Frame data also proves foot stooling MK doesn't work and MetaKnight is in a position to counter your options with...everything he has currently.
Cute try.

"After all, the ones who only truly endorsed the terrible LGL idea were staunchly anti-ban and had made it clear they had no desire to change their stance."

The LGL is a terrible idea? So is the 50 grab limit a terrible idea too? I guess every person that thinks there should be a LGL at all is anti-every character ban. Because there's apparently something wrong with that.

Yes.
it is a hilariously bad idea and the best part is you have NOT refuted any of my statements or any of the other statements made against the LgL.

Prove that Sonic, Ganondorf, Wario, Bowser, Sheik, Zelda, Fox, Falco, DDD, Diddy Kong, Donkey Kong, Olimar, etc etc etc all have incredibly powerful ledge grab games that warrant limiting them.

Let alone that limiting a basic part of gameplay in itself is incredibly bad.
You might as well try insituting an air time limit and it would be just the same as the LGL

In all seriousness Anti-ban doesn't need to. The data presented for pro-ban is already enough proof. Again watch MikeHaze's second video on the matter.

Anti-ban needs to.
Pro-ban provided all the information required in order to support their argument of MetaKnight being ban worthy.

Anti-ban must refute them because that is the current status.
Stop also mentioning Mikehaze's second video and either quote it, or link it.

 

[zmx]

"The whole "Quit QQing and get better argument" didn't work for the past 3 years and it won't work now."

AKA why NA lost apex.

"Prove that Sonic, Ganondorf, Wario, Bowser, Sheik, Zelda, Fox, Falco, DDD, Diddy Kong, Donkey Kong, Olimar, etc etc etc all have incredibly powerful ledge grab games that warrant limiting them."

A good chunk of these do have solid planking games such as DK. No, I'm not going into every single one of them. I don't know the extent of every single one of them but some like Falco, it's a safe bet to say are weak. I have no problem admitting I don't know everything.

At the same time we're not banning DK are we?

"Stop also mentioning Mikehaze's second video and either quote it, or link it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD11l3omQzM

 

[ShadowLink84]

AKA why NA lost apex.

That does not even make sense. -_-

A good chunk of these do have solid planking games such as DK.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

No, I'm not going into every single one of them. I don't know the extent of every single one of them but some like Falco, it's a safe bet to say are weak. I have no problem admitting I don't know everything.
At the same time we're not banning DK are we?

Dk!=Mk

Just because they share a letter as part of their initials doesn't mean they are the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD11l3omQzM

Bout time.

Use quote tags too and we will be golden.


Edit: Aaaaand I already dislike this video in some ways.

Popularity regarding Metaknight was not used as part of why he was banned.
It should not even be entertained at all as to what dictates a character ban.
After all, many, many characters see extreme popularity but this does not mean they are banworthy, and no one ever made such a statement.

The question is primarily how successful the character is at a high level of play and whether or not this hinders the competitiveness of the game.

Furthermore, the distribution of the prize money is done only in the event it is shown that the character was a part of their success in the tournament.

For example, let us say M2K went to the tournament and used MK and DDD. He used them both evenly, but in every single case that he used DDD, he lost. DDD would not be attributed prize money because of the fact he did not see any success using King DDD. Otherwise, the chart could easily have seen inflation in the event someone used Ganondorf a single time.

 

[zmx]

When a player base has a "learn to adapt" sort of mentality and the other has a "get rid of my obstacles, I need to find a new John" mentality which one do you think is going to perform better despite all odds?

Kindly explain how DK doesn't have a strong planking game.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hey guys, I'll tell you what: I'll take the claim "Nobody but MK is broken on the ledge" seriously when the Unity Ruleset gets rid of its global ledge grab limit. Which was added by popular demand after the most notable thing at a major national was a set where one top player abused the **** out of it.

 

[ShadowLink84]

When a player base has a "learn to adapt" sort of mentality and the other has a "get rid of my obstacles, I need to find a new John" mentality which one do you think is going to perform better despite all odds?

So are you trying to insinuate that M2K, Ally, ADHD and many other top player's don't try to learn to adapt?
Are you honestly going to try and make such a blanket statement, when the community was split regarding the issue for 3 years? Most of which often meant pro-ban seceding to anti-ban and giving the issue more time to figure out how to deal with MetaKnight.

Just....wow...I am amazed you would make such an ignorant, and unfounded claim on the entire American and the Japanese community.

Kindly explain how DK doesn't have a strong planking game.

Never said he doesn't have a strong planking game.
He simply does not have a broken planking game.
That's the difference.

 

[John12346]

Everything else was already kind of covered, but this part is really important.

I already covered the argument that MikeHAZE made against my data.

You're free to respond to the rest of my refutations, but this the only thing that hasn't been mentioned yet.
.
.
.
.
.

Mikehaze refuted the point about MK winning 45% of tourny money. This is extremely misleading I urge people to watch his video.

Here.

Now shut up and be glad that I'm not using this to argue that MK has won MORE than 45% of all tournament money, because I can more than easily make a case for it with that.
.
.
.
.
.
[collapse=The rest of my response to zmx, which has more or less already been covered.]

Those stages many believe (as this very topic suggests) shouldn't be legal anyways with or without MK. A stage shouldn't decide who wins, player skill should decide this. Otherwise the whole purpose of a tournament and proper seeding is lost. So saying with MK we lose these stages is absurd, they are laughable for competitive play in the first place.

You seem to be missing the part where it's not multiple people stating that Delfino/Frigate/Brinstar/RC should be banned, but rather the same two or three people saying it multiple times.

Anyone who thinks that Delfino or Frigate should be banned is screwed up in the head, because there's really nothing competitively wrong with those stages. In addition, the people who have been saying it are saying it because they feel the stages need to be removed because of MK's existence, not because the stages are not competitively sound. Read everything over again.

As far as Brinstar and RC, they are controversial, yes, but according to the one and only poll held on this topic, only ~55% of the people who thought MK should be banned also thought Brinstar and RC should be banned. Certainly not enough to ban the stages, especially since MK wasn't banned of these percents a few years back.

If you have a problem with that poll, you're welcome to hold your own, but until you uncover new data, this one's data stands firmly.

All in all, what I'm saying is that, when we neglect MK, Delfino, Frigate, RC, and Brinstar are all still deemed appropriate for competitive play, and it's as simple as that. The stages may need to be removed if MK sticks around, but without him, the stages are perfectly fine.

A Ness that put in so much work to beat DDD shouldn't lose to one mistake by getting grabbed on delphino/Castle seige.

Yeah, and a Ganon that put in so much work to beat the ICs shouldn't lose to one mistake by getting grabbed on Final Destination. Welcome to matchups and counterpick stages...

Temporary walkoffs are what make up the counterpick qualities of a counterpick stage, and if a character has an advantage there, then they are free to go ahead and use it. If a character suffers on more than one stage, then that makes the character bad to begin with.

Other characters have strong planking games. Hence why we have a limit for every character. So by that logic since we've imposed surgical limits on every character, they ALL should be banned as according to you we've "admitted" they are broken under normal gameplay. Planking isn't unbeatable in the first place but that's another topic all together.

Read the lines a little better.

At the moment, a 50 ledge grab limit is what is currently defined as normal, unrestricted gameplay(even though there are those who believe there shouldn't be a limit, except for MK). Guess what? MK has 35, which seems to be arbitrarily different from our currently defined 50. Surgical nerf.

The same could be said for pretty much all other "surgical limits" air planking/scrooging etc. Other characters like Pit can do it yet we don't ban them.

Except that Pit hasn't won ten billion tournies planking and scrooging and stalling his *** off for time. Hell, I don't think he's won more than 5 tournies in the US in all of 2011. The reason why all of these rules are suggested/put into effect are BECAUSE of Meta Knight's existence, and no one else's.

What is more, by the nature of tournys, by taking items off, we are already imposing surgical limits on EVERY character.

Not exactly. Items were removed because they were unfit for competitive play, not because every character broke the game with them.

Plus, item toggling is an option, so doing so is just as fine as using Stock over Time, for example. Choosing what stages we use, etc.

This is refuted by my earlier point. Every character is already nerfed for tourny play since items are off where characters like Peach would certainly be miles better with them on. So please don't act as if any of this is MK specific. It's not. There is no double standard here.

Immediately refuted by my earlier refutation.

Things are removed from the game because they are deemed unfit for competitive play, with the one exception being MK's blatantly lowered LGL compared to the rest of the cast. The 50 LGL may be a random arbitrary nerf that came out of left field, but you must remember that, at the moment, it IS what we consider to be normal gameplay, and MK defies even that by having an even lower LGL than that forced onto him.

"In addition to that, the fact that MK has an amazing moveset, is the best character in the game, has had his own tier for quite some time now, has no bad matchups and arguably no evens, has won upside ~45% of all tournament money, and above half from regionals and nationals only, how he generally kills hype when he wins/grand finals is MK dittos, etc. etc. etc. is merely icing on the cake, and should not be taken as a ban criteria all on it's own, but it doesn't help MK's case in the slightest, having (SSF4AE Yun/SF3S Chun/*insert other OP fighting game characters here*) status in addition to breaking the game, as stated earlier."

Mikehaze refuted the point about MK winning 45% of tourny money. This is extremely misleading I urge people to watch his video.

Here.

Now shut up and be glad that I'm not using this to argue that MK has won MORE than 45% of all tournament money, because I can more than easily make a case for it with that.

And the best character having an amazing move-set? Who could have guessed.

You didn't read. I said the fact that MK is an OP character isn't helping his case at all. I only iterated that the fact that he's an amazing character is icing on the cake, in addition to all of the bull**** that I covered earlier in this post.

It shouldn't be used solely as a ban criteria. I acknowledge that.

Because let's face it, if it were Ganon who had the game breaking planking and had to have surgical nerfs placed all over him and people had to suggest that we restrict the whole entire ruleset just to accomdate him, but still remained the ****ty character that he is, I'm pretty sure we'd be quite a bit more hesitant on the ban.

Also MK has weaknesses as well, everyone seems to forget about. He has no projectiles. He's one of the lightest characters in the game. He's subject to grab release-death by several characters. All these things you gloss over when talking about how great he is.

We can sit here and argue MK's weaknesses, or you could try to explain away why MK has been so goddamn successful in tournament play despite having these so called "weaknesses."

MK has ways to circumvent all of his weaknesses, like Nado/scrooging/planking/air camping to alleviate his lack of projectile, his Frame ~13 Uair for momentum cancels which makes him live unnaturally longer than he should be, and it's really freaking hard to grab MK in the first place when he's busy mixing you up between Dtilt, Ftilt1, Ftilt2, GSL, Nair, SHFair, Dash Grab, Dash Attack, etc., as well as air camping your *** to death.

This next part is just guesswork, since I'm not actually in the URC, but it serves to reason that they likely knew all of the "reasons" why pro-ban AND anti-ban felt the ban was or wasn't justified, and they likely took the poll, perhaps because the URC does value the community pretty highly, as the final measure to see if MK should ultimately be banned in the states.

All speculation and thus I have no need to refute any of this.

Okay, then as proof, explain why they decided to ban MK mere weeks/months after the poll concluded. It's pretty obvious that they made their vote after the community vote, just given the timeframe, so what other explanation could there possibly be...?

Most tourneygoing users who don't frequent Metagame and Ruleset have not read all of these arguments and know them down to the finest detail, but they do understand most of the arguments despite not reading them because they have been able to experience most of these things, either through playing themselves, or watching other matches with Meta Knight ******ry. Because of this, about 3/4 of the community voted for the ultimate ban of MK, because they were fed up with all of the above stated nonsense that's been going on for 3 years.

Appeal to the masses fallacy again. I thought you said this isn't what this argument was about John?

It should also be enough reason for this case of a poll to avert the argumentum ad populum fallacy counterargument, as well. Most tournament goers knew the reasons why MK should or shouldn't have been banned, because most should have had first hand experience with all of the "reasons" for or against the ban in the first place.

Pure speculation again.

- People booing M2K at Apex 2010
- M2K vs Gnes yeah we seen dawg
- Meta Knight da bes

3 examples that immediately come to mind.

There are also a medley of matches on YT, on many popular Brawl provider's channels where you can see MK employing powerful tactics that most are fed up on seeing at this point. Plus, people watch streams, play in tournaments, listen to Directional Influence, etc. There's also the part where MK kills hype at tournaments, which I have seen and experienced firsthand.

So I can safely say that, while people may not have had "MK needs to be banned because surgical nerfs break the game," they had the right intention that they wanted to bring back the hype, help out the community, end the utter bore-fests that are MK vs anyone or MK dittos in grand finals, or w/e, which, mind you, are all indirect effects of the reasons why pro-ban believes that MK should've been banned in the first place.

Perhaps some had mal-intent in that they were fed up of losing to Meta Knight, but you guys had similar people voting against the ban because they don't want to lose their money main.[/collapse]

 

[ShadowLink84]

John ****** ZMX

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZZUMjoxfZA

My thoughts.

 

[zmx]

Also in regards to it only counting if you win. That still doesn't justify it accounting for 50% of the prize. Perhaps you didn't understand. Say x player win a tourny using DDD. He wins 95% of his matches with DDD. For one match he resorts to MK due to a counterpick on say brinstar and wins.

Does that sound fair to you? DDD was used 95% of the time and yet prize money is distributed evenly to MK?

ATT: John

Attack the argument, not the arguer. kthanks
Using phrases like "shut up i so mad at uuu" doesn't strengthen your argument.

Every character has a 50 grab limit. Correct? This is a surgical limit. End of story. I don't care if it's defined as the norm, it's only the norm because someone defined it to be. So your main justification of outright banning MK due to surgical limits having to be placed otherwise is special pleading. We don't ban others for the apparent surgical limits placed on everyone.

Edit:

Also Shadow are you saying DK has never won because of planking like MK has? Because that's just not true. It might not be broken as MKs but it's enough to get him wins.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

Wow, John Numbers.

So I guess one of the criterion for banning now is not just over-centralization, but ennui!

This is exactly why pro-ban pisses me off. Banning MK because of the surgical rules is all well and fine, as it's objective to a point where it can be clinically regarded, but sheer BOREDOM is arbitrary in the extreme and SHOULD NOT be considered when BANNING something.

Smooth Criminal

 

[ShadowLink84]

stuff

You just flat out ignored everything that was palced down by John including his refutation regarding Mike's critique as well as the explanation of character money split.

The hell?

snip

This is why anti-ban pisses me off.

 

[zmx]

You just flat out ignored everything that was palced down by John including his refutation regarding Mike's critique as well as the explanation of character money split.

The hell?



This is why anti-ban pisses me off.

Ummm what? I discussed the main part of his counter argument. Do I have to do it again?
I'm not a super computer. Obv. I can't respond to everything right away.

1.MK needs surgical limits (35 LGL). Therefore he should be banned.
2. I said so do other characters.
3. His reply? Yeah but it isn't as much. Plus 50 LGL, that's the norm.
4. My reply. The norm can be defined as anything. The mere fact that we have to impose any sort of LGL means a surgical limit is being placed. Therefore by his own logic every character needs to be banned or we take off the LGL all together.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Ummm what? I discussed the main part of his counter argument. Do I have to do it again?
I'm not a super computer. Obv. I can't respond to everything right away.

You ignored the issue regarding his data which is one of the more important parts as it provides actual data.

1.MK needs surgical limits (35 LGL). Therefore he should be banned.
2. I said so do other characters.
3. His reply? Yeah but it isn't as much. Plus 50 LGL, that's the norm.
4. My reply. The norm can be defined as anything. The mere fact that we have to impose any sort of LGL means a surgical limit is being placed. Therefore by his own logic every character needs to be banned or we take off the LGL all together.

*facepalm*
He also said that the LgL was placed primarily because of MetaKnight's gameplay.
Not because of an issue regarding ledge play in itself.

The Lgl was placed because of MK.
To mask this fact; they also implemented a 50 ledge grab limit on every other character.
That was his point.


@Smooth criminal: Boredom is arbitrary as hell, but thankfully, that isn't part of criteria regarding banning a character. Let alone the blanket statement is awful as well.

This is part of why I dislike anti-ban. =\

 

[Steam]

This is why I dislike MK ban debates.

 

[Cassio]

John that was an argument before Apex. Like I said earlier, the best way to see apex is like the lense of truth from OOT. We looked at all the information we had in a particular way from our limited perspective with our metagame. The japanese provided us a lense with which to take a deeper look into the truth of our metagame, and it turns out in many areas we were wrong, including how powerful we once though MKs tactics to be. New perspectives can often cause drastic changes, not just in video games either.

Also like I said to twinkie I'd discuss surgical nerfs with you, but last time that happened several pages were spent discussing it only for 99% of people to not care on either side. People will nerf the hell out of this game given the chance, and they dont care about the arguments on either side of that. So it seems pointless. The gist however is that weve already nerfed our game, and the nerfs we made are what empowered metaknight in the first place. So criticizing nerfs after we've already nerfed it isnt consistent. Anyone who advocates against surgical nerfs should be advocating against the initial nerfs we've put in place that would balance the game in the first place, instead they ask for more.

 

[John12346]

Alright, if you really want me to try that again, zmx...

Mikehaze refuted the point about MK winning 45% of tourny money. This is extremely misleading I urge people to watch his video.

Here.

Be wary and thankful that I don't use this to argue that MK has won MORE than 45% of all tournament money in 2011, because that data easily proves it.
.
.
.
.
.
@ Smooth Criminal, keep in mind I didn't say boredom or fixing the community is a MK ban criteria, I said that it's a lot of the reason why pro-ban tourneygoers who do not frequent Metagame and Ruleset voted Yes for the ban, is all.
.
.
.
.
.
@ Cassio, I know, I know, that's why I said

Just as a reminder, this is to explain what I believe what ultimately led up to the URC's decision to ban MK, and NOT why he should remain banned, as that is an entirely different argument.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

This is why anti-ban pisses me off.

Shadow, c'mon. Boredom? Really? That's like saying we should ban Brawl altogether because I find the nuances of its gameplay shallow. Boredom is entirely subjective. That's not something that needs to be considered when you ban something.

I agree with the pro-banners that have actually flat-out given empirical evidence concerning MK's LGL and planking. Okay? I didn't feel that theirs was the strongest case in the world, that there could have been some secret tech out there or something that could've trumped it, but it was a good reason because they were looking at it from the perspective that MK breaks the game with his shenanigans. With facts, not subjective hogwash like over-centralization (which happens in every other competitive game in existence to some degree), earnings (which can also be centric around one character or a set of characters), and boredom (which is an entirely subjective thing that varies wildly from player-to-player, game-to-game).

This, however, is just stupid and it makes ya'll look utterly pedantic. You need to reinforce this ban armed with the right reasons. Comments about boredom shouldn't be cropping up anywhere.

Edit: Okay, John. Fair enough. I apologize.

Smooth Criminal