Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

[Spelt]

...
...
...

Am I the only one who sees it?

Do you have to bring up my eyesight problems? ):

 

[momochuu]

...
...
...

Am I the only one who sees it?

Yes. It's a contradictory statement. Whatever.

 

[Rykoshet]

Just making sure I'm not tripping out here.

 

[Crizthakidd]

the best char to switch to if mk is banned is snake and wario with DDD as a good secondary.

this vote cant count for too much tho. people making 4 accounts just to spite the mks and they dont know what they are doing and voteing YES.

some people think he should stay and they will still vote yes cuz they think its funny. this system is beyond flawed.

 

[RDK]

IMO, saying "You admit . . ." and then twisting a persons words around to suit your argument is one of the scrubbiest ways to debate ever. That is all. I have really no need to argue for pro or anti ban at this point, though tbh I feel like the people posting in this thread are doing a very poor job of representing either.

Let's go to his post, shall we?

You've just nitpicked at my words while I keep pointing out that up to this point you've put in no effort whatsoever into doing the one thing the people without the burden of proof should be doing, reading.

Tell me, what do you think he meant by that?

...
...
...

Am I the only one who sees it?

Nope, I saw it too. And it's a ridiculous point to make. I think it'd be best to just ignore him.

Edit: Kawaii, you're a mod. You should know better.

 

[SuSa]

I would argue that Snake, Falco, and GnW are the ones that would see a lot of increased use. D3 is actually a bit more difficult to use than people give him credit for.

Snake being easier then D3?

Blasphemy.... no one understands how hard it is to actually play Snake at a high level....

 

[Clai]

Thrilla's de-bunkment of the first post, leading up to:

I see a lot of assertions made with no argument or evidences behind them here. I bolded/underlined/colored the most notable offense. It should also be noted that the pro-ban camp has openly admitted that they are attempting to ban a character due to their own personal preferences, which once again goes back to my original point of why that doesn’t work. As to food on low, I can attest to a few percentages meaning quite a bit as a player of a lighter character. Having those few less percents can be game changing, and again it has the random problem.

At this point I don’t have much of a reason to continue due it it being clear that the entire argument is based on a faulty premise. I can continue later if people want me to, but for the time being I’m done and wish to go back to lurking.

Man, this is a good argument. I already handled the entirety of the first post a couple of pages ago, but you bring up some very good points too. Let's hear the pro-side try to counter both of our arguments. Hoo-ah!

 

[KevinM]

Most of the characters are harder to use at a high level of play.

Most people here will never achieve that level and therefore make over simplifications.

 

[generalsmash]

It's only a matter of time were people are going to try to ban Snake :/

 

[Rykoshet]

Tell me, what do you think he meant by that?

I meant that it has been established that the anti-ban side is the one that believes they have no burden. Since I have already argued why I believe this to be false, I'm pointing out that the anti-ban side is exacerbating the issue by not doing what little they believe they're obligated to still do.

 

[Rykoshet]

It's only a matter of time were people are going to try to ban Snake :/

You, get off my (ex)-main, now.

 

[Melomaniacal]

It's only a matter of time were people are going to try to ban Snake :/

Before I tell you how wrong you are...

Why would we ban Snake?

 

[thrillagorilla]

Man, this is a good argument. I already handled the entirety of the first post a couple of pages ago, but you bring up some very good points too. Let's hear the pro-side try to counter both of our arguments. Hoo-ah!

Thank you, and I'm sorry if I re-tread what you said. I've been working on this for about an hour now and must have missed it. Do you mind posting a link to it so I can take a look?

Edit:

I meant that it has been established that the anti-ban side is the one that believes they have no burden. Since I have already argued why I believe this to be false, I'm pointing out that the anti-ban side is exacerbating the issue by not doing what little they believe they're obligated to still do.

Pro-ban is suggesting change. The burden of proof as to why those changes are necessary lies with them. Its at the very least the rules of debate.

 

[lordvaati]

Most of the characters are harder to use at a high level of play.

Most people here will never achieve that level and therefore make over simplifications.
Reply With Quote

agree. I totally suck with Fox in Melee, and am mediocre with Pika in 64. I have bad luck with tops.

 

[Clai]

Thank you, and I'm sorry if I re-tread what you said. I've been working on this for about an hour now and must have missed it. Do you mind posting a link to it so I can take a look?

Here it is.

No worries, man, it took me around 2 hours to get my argument in, it gets tiring going after all of the points. A quick read of your arguments shows that you haven't put in anything that I said. I took a different approach to the argument. Have fun.

 

[RDK]

I meant that it has been established that the anti-ban side is the one that believes they have no burden. Since I have already argued why I believe this to be false, I'm pointing out that the anti-ban side is exacerbating the issue by not doing what little they believe they're obligated to still do.

And I'm telling you that your argument is stupid. Now you've continued to call the principle of burden of proof bullcrap, and you've completely ignored Adumbrdeus's post completely, so if you're going to flat out refuse to discuss this logically then I'm just going to ignore everything you say from now on, which I should have done a long time ago.

 

[fkacyan]

Snake being easier then D3?

Blasphemy.... no one understands how hard it is to actually play Snake at a high level....

We're not talking high level here, SuSa. Snake is probably one of the deepest characters in the game; I can't fathom the zoning Ally does consistently. It's rare that you do something he didn't want you to when he's in control of a match.

However, in terms of fair-weather players, Snake's basic game is far easier than D3's. Throw nades, tilt, use c4s is far easier than tech chasing and timing your moves.

 

[thrillagorilla]

Here it is.

No worries, man, it took me around 2 hours to get my argument in, it gets tiring going after all of the points. A quick read of your arguments shows that you haven't put in anything that I said. I took a different approach to the argument. Have fun.

Thank you clai. I'm looking at it now.

 

[generalsmash]

You, get off my (ex)-main, now.

He's my second main.

@Melomaniacal: Because Snake is right under Metaknight in the tier list.

Why are people *****ing around Metaknight getting banned while they could think of a way of beating him.

 

[da K.I.D.]

True but the game Smash is a lot harder to set rules on as there are x10 more variables than in standard fighting games, making many points in this thread vague and with not enough substance.

This is one of the most important, scratch that, out side of the first page, this is the most important post in this entire thread

 

[fkacyan]

This is one of the most important, scratch that, out side of the first page, this is the most important post in this entire thread

Given that we're talking theory, we assume player skill and matchup knowledge are equal, leaving the variable to be the character matchup at hand.

That post is entirely useless.

 

[Clai]

He's my second main.

@Melomaniacal: Because Snake is right under Metaknight in the tier list.

Why are people *****ing around Metaknight getting banned while they could think of a way of beating him.

Because they've seen what Metaknight can do and think, "Dammit, every Metaknight I'll ever play will execute this strategy perfectly, and thus I will never, ever have a chance of beating him and prevent him from gobbling up tournament placings, no matter what I do. Might as well remove him from the game so I won't have to put up with this."

?

 

[Rykoshet]

And I'm telling you that your argument is stupid. Now you've continued to call the principle of burden of proof bullcrap, and you've completely ignored Adumbrdeus's post completely, so if you're going to flat out refuse to discuss this logically then I'm just going to ignore everything you say from now on, which I should have done a long time ago.

It's well established that you've been doing that off the bat since I already addressed one part of his blog in between your last response and this response and have long since moved on from the burden of proof argument. You asked dan what he thought I meant by what I said, I clarified. If you're going to get pissy when someone answers your questions then dont ****ing ask them.

 

[Melomaniacal]

He's my second main.

@Melomaniacal: Because Snake is right under Metaknight in the tier list.

Why are people *****ing around Metaknight getting banned while they could think of a way of beating him.

...Snake is not nearly as close as MK to being broken, and MK is already miles upon miles away from that.

 

[ShadowLink84]

My response:

Arrgh why'd you have to make your response in such a fashion. It makes go grrrr cause cant simply cpoy paste your name when quoting.
arrrghh grrrrrr

How much does Snake lose when Metaknight counterpicks a stage? How about Wario? I bet you its not enough that the stage becomes a deciding factor when it comes to the match.

Actually it can go from something event to a soft disadvantage.

Snake does NOT want to go to rainbow cruise, and he sure as hell hates any sage that would interfere with his ground game.

Wario I am not too sure about, I would need to ask Fiction.

People should not be pressured to using/not using a character if they are comfortable/not comfortable using that character. Let them make the decisions they want to make; they know the implications to their decision.

Playing to win is all that matters. If you play to win you go with the best choice. At the start of a set that choice is MK because while he may not have the largest advantage, he will not suffer a disadvantage.

When money's on the line, I think we can say, barring extreme circumstances, that both players were playing with the best of their abilities and using the characters to the best of their abilities. So saying that top players, using the best of their abilities, with other characters, can beat top players, using the best of their abilities, who used the best character, is a completely viable argument if we're trying to remove the best character from the game.

Woah woah woah. Terrible flaw in your argument.
Simply because money is on the line does not mean that the best they are giving is their absolute best.

trying your hardest doesnt automatically mean you are playing at peak efficiency.
For example the matches between ally and m2k where m2k was spiked by Fairs, landed on minesm, and made several errors that cost him the match.

Such a statement is far too generic and ignores the many variables that come along with simply being human.

Oe can say, they tried their hardest, one cannot say, they played their best.

I got all the info on my post here: Look here. Looks like I've already refuted most of your argument.

I'll get to the grit of it now. One moment.

Ok, so Metaknight doesn't have matchups that hinder him (based on the character alone and having nothing to do with the skill of the player) or stages that limit his abilities. Counterpicking stages may be something new to the Smash series compared to other fighting games, but the Metaknight player can't pick any stages after he/she loses that completely destroys Snake, Diddy Kong, Wario or the other high-tier characters. This is mostly because one of the main requirements of being a high-tier character is to adapt to any stage without being completely neutralized. Honestly, if there were two stages that Diddy Kong absolutely cannot play on, Diddy Kong would be unable to win any tournament match where the opponent can counterpick and thus he wouldn't be a high-tier character.

The point is not that Mk is taking a character to a stage that absolutely destroys them, but is taking them to a stage that they perform less efficiently.
Diddy's performance on battlefield is lesser than that on FD.
Snake's performance on Halberd is greater than his performance on FD or SV.

It isn't about MK destroying a character, its about him always being the safest choice and always ensuring he will never be disadvantaged.
Since ev when he is taken to the opponents best stage, he still has the tools to deal with it and ensure the matchup is not in his disadvantage.

I cannot see how this refutes the argument regarding MK's resistance to CPing.
Every other character except MK has a stage where they suffer some sort of disadvantage.
For Diddy this is stage withplatforms like lylat cruise.
For Olimar its rainbow.
For Falco its Battlefield.

MK has none, the worst is FD and it is hi worst in that he GAINS the least from i. Where as every oher character loses something MK loses nothing. Making it extremely hard to deal with him and exploit his few weaknesses.

Now for "Metaknight can't be counterpicked based on character." Are you beginning to understand what being the best character in the game means? Many of the best characters in other fighting games can't be counterpicked based on characters as well, and many of them aren't even close to bannable. That's not the reason this reason is invalid, though. The main reason is that Metaknight has enough 60:40 or 55:45 matchups that you can stick with your main and generally have a solid chance of winning

Except that this argument is invalid. For one many other games, as I said earlier, do not involve interaction from the stage.

Even the most minor of influences from the stage can have an impact on gameplay in the smash series.
Platforms will impact on Diddy's banana game.
lowe borders and aplatform impacts on snake's game.
A constantly moving stage that does not allow for camping impacts Olimar's.
So on and so forth.

It isn't just one or the other, its the fact that both combined are not enough to place MK in a position where his weaknesses can be exploited with low risk.
So your argument cannot really refute my statement because it relies on the separation of these two factors.

My argument hinges on both these issues, both stage and character.

With the high amount of characters that are completely viable against Metaknight, regardless of stages, the need to counterpick Metaknight is greatly diminished to the point where most top players aren't affected by the counterpicking system. Therefore, MK does not break the counterpicking system, by character or by stage, as there is nothing that separates Metagame to the cast of this game from the best characters in other fighting games and the rest of the cast in their respective games.

This is not true at all.
Simply based upon character capability it is obvious that stages will impact on thei performance. No matter how good of a palyer you are, there are weaknesses that ou simply cannot cover completely.

Even the best Diddy player will have an issue with Luigi on FD. This becomes even more difficult in an area like battlefield or rainbow cruise where he cannot utilizhis bananas to the greatest of their effect.

So the argment that top players aren't affected by the CP system is invalid. Simply because if they are not affected, then it is due in part to the character.
Olimar's ground game is always going to have issues in RC and will always have an issue facing Peach.

A completely viable character against MK, is simply another MK.
Snake has his stages where he does lesser than normal.
So does DDD, DK, Olimar, Lucario, Marth , ROB etc etc.
It is an unavoidable issue.

This is just not right. The reason people pick up secondaries is because they want to feel comfortable fighting any character in the game even when they're fighting a character that would make them uncomfortable with their main.
All these numbers and talk about matchups is way too objective; r

Woh woah, back up for a second.
How can you be too objective?
An objective agument contains no bias, does not attempt to persuade here logic and evidence fails.
if I provided frame data fr and it showed he had shield advantage on every move, how is that too objective?

You cannot be too objective, for objectivity is actually the basis of the ban requirement.
Over centralization is an objective requirement.

Remember the player is the one counterpicking, not the game telling the player what to counterpick. If a certain player is comfortable fighting Metaknight with Jigglypuff, even when all sound logic says that player shouldn't, should he really stop him/her from picking who he/she wants? If someone is counterpicking Metaknight with another Metaknight for the sole reason that "it's the ideal universal option,' and yet the player is uncomfortable with using Metaknight, that player, more often than not, has already lost the match before it started

THat is irrelevant. If I choose to play a Ganondorf against MK, how does that at all refute my statement i regards to CPing?
All it means is that the player made a REALLY illogical choice that will harm him/her greatly.
This argument is too subjective to hold any merit, the player's error, or choices in not choosing to play to win hold no weight.
Since such arguments are subjective and can go either way.
That is the inherent flaw to them.


your argument does not refute, primarily because it separates CPing into character and stage, whereas my argument is involving both of them.
The second part in regards to the players CP choices is irrelevant because we assume that the player will always want to make the best choice in the situation and not a completely illogical one such as choosing Ganondorf against MK on Rainbow Cruise.

 

[Divinokage]

Given that we're talking theory, we assume player skill and matchup knowledge are equal, leaving the variable to be the character matchup at hand.

That post is entirely useless.

I was actually making fun of all the rules and that you can't play smash at it is like normal fighting games. A group of people had to create many rules just to make smash playable at a competitive level. The game itself was never meant to be competitive.

 

[fkacyan]

I was actually making fun of all the rules and that you can't play smash at it is like normal fighting games. A group of people had to create many rules just to make smash playable at a competitive level. The game itself was never meant to be competitive.

That's fairly obvious, considering that Sakurai put random tripping into this one. You have to keep in mind, though, da K.I.D. takes that kinda thing seriously, so I had to debunk it before it was actually discussed as if it mattered.

ETA: See Shadowlink's post below mine.

 

[ShadowLink84]

This is one of the most important, scratch that, out side of the first page, this is the most important post in this entire thread

Can you do me a favor kid.
please

STOP
THE
+1
POSTS!

I don't care if its the most golden thing in the world, I don't care if it is the meaning of life or the secret to immortality. You're not contributing ANYTHING. Seriously, this topic moves so quick because of such posts!

 

[SnowballBob33]

People who suggest simple solutions like, just get around it are complete idiots. Why would this even be a discussion if people in the SBR didn't have the same issue with MK? This is affecting all levels of play. They should be kicked out now because they are stupid and don't know how to beat such an easy character as MK.

 

[generalsmash]

Because they've seen what Metaknight can do and think, "Dammit, every Metaknight I'll ever play will execute this strategy perfectly, and thus I will never, ever have a chance of beating him and prevent him from gobbling up tournament placings, no matter what I do. Might as well remove him from the game so I won't have to put up with this."

?

So that's why you need to think of a way around it. Like why don't you try to learn on how to DI out of his Tornado and how to avoid getting gimped. I hate that his D-Air gimps my Ike but that doesn't stop me from thinking on how to avoid it. Johny complainers

 

[Eddie G]

Can you do me a favor kid.
please

STOP
THE
+1
POSTS!

I don't care if its the most golden thing in the world, I don't care if it is the meaning of life or the secret to immortality. You're not contributing ANYTHING. Seriously, this topic moves so quick because of such arguments.

And your post is any...different?

Honestly, what more can even be contributed to this topic that would even matter? It's a dead horse at this point. Answer me this.

 

[thrillagorilla]

*waits for shadowlink to respond to his post*

 

[Divinokage]

People who suggest simple solutions like, just get around it are complete idiots. Why would this even be a discussion if people in the SBR didn't have the same issue with MK? This is affecting all levels of play. They should be kicked out now because they are stupid and don't know how to beat such an easy character as MK.

They are stupid? Then it's fair to say you are stupid too because if MK was so easy then how come you are not winning tournaments? How come you will never be able to beat M2k, Tyrant, Dojo.. etc?

 

[Eddie G]

*waits for shadowlink to respond to his post*

Careful there, you may be randomly ranted upon for not contributing to the topic at hand with your ONE post.

/just saying

 

[fkacyan]

Careful there, you may be randomly ranted upon for not contributing to the topic at hand with your ONE post.

/just saying

For whatever reason, I just don't like you. I can't even think of why.

Ah well.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Ah you know what, let me do like thio.
*walks away*

 

[adumbrodeus]

Heh, I just happen to have picked up and used Ganon since the game's release. Ganon's so good at this game!



My response:



I've said about this:




How much does Snake lose when Metaknight counterpicks a stage? How about Wario? I bet you its not enough that the stage becomes a deciding factor when it comes to the match.



People should not be pressured to using/not using a character if they are comfortable/not comfortable using that character. Let them make the decisions they want to make; they know the implications to their decision.



When money's on the line, I think we can say, barring extreme circumstances, that both players were playing with the best of their abilities and using the characters to the best of their abilities. So saying that top players, using the best of their abilities, with other characters, can beat top players, using the best of their abilities, who used the best character, is a completely viable argument if we're trying to remove the best character from the game.

I tried. Go ahead an refute as you will, I won't defend since its really not something I am into right now.

I got all the info on my post here: Look here. Looks like I've already refuted most of your argument.[/QUOTE]

I just need to make this point.

Shadowlink is one of the most consistent anti-banners here.


Just realize that he (and I as well) think that a lot of people underrate MK's capabilities especially in terms of match-ups overall.

 

[MarKO X]

in reference to something about personal preference........

aren't the rules that the TOs use for their tournaments personal preference? Isn't the idea that "random not being the best for competitive play" personal preference?

 

[Eddie G]

For whatever reason, I just don't like you. I can't even say why.

Ah well.

Well that's too bad. I'm not usually so provocative, but when some people are so prude it just baits it out of me.

That's really unfortunate that you already came to such a conclusion about me though, and really shows why threads like these suck.

Ah well.

 

[RDK]

in reference to something about personal preference........

aren't the rules that the TOs use for their tournaments personal preference? Isn't the idea that "random not being the best for competitive play" personal preference?

TO's don't have to abide by SBR rules; it's more of a general guideline. They can basically do whatever the hell they want. The point is that nobody will attend tournaments where MK is banned, which is fine because nobody important would attend scrub tournaments anyway.