Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
They say what? That the SBR approved ruleset is merely a suggested ruleset and does not have to be used in its entirety if the TO doesn't want it?
Emphasis on MOST and SBR Approved ruleset.
Of course you should win at reasonably high levels of play if you win round one. You have to win one more game and they have to win two more games. Thats a big advantage in a three game set.
And the pro-ban posts simply repeat things that the anti-ban side has responded to a dozen times, in which they repeat themselves again. It's especially bothersome when the pro-ban side tries to state things in absolute terms when it's been thoroughly debunked and proven to fail in all senses of common intellect.
I think the community needs to stop catering to people who can't get past certain faults and refuse to work toward getting past them and choose instead to whine about it. I'm a prick. You know what, though? It's how life is. I don't really care if it's a game, or about education, or about anything else that these people may encounter. It's a mentality that incredibly bothers people like myself and it's going to irk us if the community breaks and caters to the whiners instead of deserting them like they deserve to be.
You're going to be a very succesful man, some day. I salute you.
Detrimental is a loaded word. Having Metaknight around hurts this community because there are too many people whining about how they keep losing to MK's in tournaments and about how MK stalling takes away from the fun of the game when these are all following the system that fighting games have followed for years. There's always going to be a strategy that comes out on top, and the strategy turns out to be 'not fun,' then guess what? It's not going to be a fun game. Anyone who's frustrated by Metaknight's existance are either going to A) study the matchup, watch videos, work on theorycraft and then try them in practice (like you're doing in the segment before) for the thrill of leaping over that hurdle and becoming a successful high-level player; B) take the supposed 'easy way out' and just pick Metaknight and see how far that takes them; C) give up and try another game. Since we're talking about Metaknight being banned from tournaments, I'm specifically talking about competitive play when I'm discussing these options. Anyone has the freedom to play the game they want it played- just don't go into our community and beg them to tailor competitive play for your tastes.
That's all dependant on what type of community we want to be: the elitists that want to see this game played to its limits, or the scrubby community that creates all of these ficticious rules just to keep them happy. You're going to alienate a crowd no matter what choice we make, so we have to make sure that that choice is the one that the most people want. If we want to make a change as radical as removing a character from competitive play, we want to be absolutely sure that this change will end up benefiting the competitive community, including tournament turnouts.
It's a shame that Brawl has one best character instead of several, but that's the way it is. If Metaknight's giving these communities the blues, they can change the rules so everybody can be happy. Just don't demand the rest of us make these changes too.
What what WHAT?
Wait, wait, if the Ice Climbers, well knowing that their grab range is absolute pittance, that they would need to work incredibly hard in order to get that grab in, knowing that the opponent- seeing the Ice Climbers- is doing everything in his/her/its power to make sure he doesn't get grabbed, and even when they somehow manage to get a grab, the Ice Climbers player- also knowing that their strategy is in the pits when Nana is separated, or worse killed, and can easily (in some cases) be reduced to a character almost as bad as Olimar without Pikmin- can still mess up the chaingrab, leading to the process repeating over again? I'm pretty sure the Ice Climbers are the definition of a high-risk, high-reward character. Yeah, tripping sucks, but the event that the act of tripping would lead to an Ice Climbers grab is so miniscule that it has no effect on tournament placings.
That's not entirely true. You have to learn about spacing, taking advantage of opportunities, the virtue of patience, character manipulation (in a word, teh mindgamez), something that all characters in this game, and indeed all fighting games everywhere, have to learn. You could be picking this game up for the very first time in a tournament, but if you already know about these essential aspects, you will place very decently. Again, the Ice Climbers are an extreme-risk, extreme-reward character, especially when one hit could lead to Nana's death and the derailment of your entire strategy. It's okay to have this kind of reward if there are appropriate risks involved with it. So no, a ban is not necessary.
Add ROB to this list too. I personally believe that Pit and Pikachu would have the chance of becoming viable too with Metaknight gone as well. Snake and Diddy Kong would remain viable but would probably lose some viability simply because how much they both function as Metaknight "counters" at the moment and how much it contributes to their popularity. I also believe the Ice Climbers would gain more viability with Metaknight gone too. Overall, I would say that Wario's the only high tier character who wouldn't be affected by Metaknight being banned.
The only 50:50 matchup on the metaknight boards is MK vs. ICs. So I don't think they'll get any more viable, now if snake was banned THEN they'd become alot more viable.
What am I supposed to be seeing? M2K gained NOTHING from the use of EDC in that video. NOTHING. Not even a percent.
Well, lucky for us, we don't have to ban them both.
Yeah, I mean who the hell gives any credence to theories?
I'm still not sure how either the ICs or GW benefit from no MK and more Snakes.
Is Gouken even good? Do you have a link to an SF4 tier list? Last one I saw had Gouken towards the middle.
What we're doing here has little to do with theorizing, at least in a scientific sense.
We can't ban a move simply because it gives one character an advantage. We ban a move because it conflicts with the ruleset the community has already made.
I'm going to press b-down and send Metaknight in this direction and WOAH! MY HAND ACCIDENTLY SLIPPED AND FOR SOME REASON I CAN'T STOP IT FROM FLICKING THE C-STICK MULTIPLE TIMES. THIS IS TOTALLY BY ACCIDENT!
Hi there.
Yeah, what "we're" doing here is having a pissing contest.
Cause he's M2K nuff said.
Lol. Tempers should be flared. Smash is serious business.
Well, I'm thinking of the problems that they give King Dedede and Falco. I'm not wholly convinced that Snake is as bad as ROB. With Snake, I think it's more of a matter of being a lot more careful with chain grabs and not going crazy with desyncing. I don't know, I don't think the match up is as looked into as compared to others simply because the Ice Climbers aren't that popular overall and there are only a few people like Lain who really excel with them.
Wait a minute... really? He gained... nothing?
yeh buddy pop a cap in you in a MM if I loose bro I'm hard like that lmfao
I don't play ICs or Snake but I think the nades would prevent CGs. And Snake's power.
My statement had nothing to do with advantage. In fact, it had nothing to do with winning.
Not important =/= don't do it.
Gouken has the best fireball camp in the game and a counter-attack that is borderline broken. However he has arguably the worst wake-up options in the entire game and some of the slowest normals. Approaching him is hard, and he has some easy big damage combos, but once you manage to approach him he has trouble. Upper mid is about right for him, and that's exactly why comparing him to MK is really dumb. (last sentence added for relevance XD)
No. Once you get grabbed, there is no in between where he can drop a grenade. Once he's grabbed he's stuck until they're done with him. If he's getting hobbled, then he can drop a grenade. But with regular chaingrabs he can't.
M2K wouldn't have reappeared in time for the ShL to land on him.Wait a minute... really? He gained... nothing?
Okay, play by play time.
1:01: M2K returning to the ledge, with 106% damage and 2 stocks. Dojo is at 42% and 1 stock, waiting for M2K
1:02 - 1:05: M2K playing on the ledge, Dojo watching carefully.
1:07: M2K grabs the legde, then uses 2 jumps.
1:08: M2K uses the DC. You can assume that Dojo's use of the SL predicted where a regular DC would end, but
1:09: M2K is safely on the ledge, beyond the half way mark of FD.
1:49: M2K dies, and Dojo has one stock left @ 61%
if Dojo woulda hit the regular DC with the SL, at worst for Dojo, he would still have M2K in a compromising situation. At best, he would've KO'd M2K, and instead of being down 61% (what actually happened) he would be down 42%.
but it's ok. Because M2K gained nothing out that. That extra 19% damage didn't help him at all.
Ok, I understand now.
edit: video link for easy access: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bK8UA3BJIVI
edit2: also realize, that was EDC only being used once...
That's much more demeaning :]
I was thinking more if he had grenades on the stage before he got grabbed.
Yes,it does.I'm kind of glad this is the last time we have to bring up the subject on banning meta knight or not and move foward as a community and advance the metagame.Instead of trying to kill each other over this subject.
True. Your post was a little vague on what the Ice Climbers infinite had to do with counterpicking, so I posted what I thought would make sense.
oh hell to the no, I do not agree with that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36fqFU7hlsc