Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

[MarKO X]

LOL.
And its times like this pro-ban gets *****...

the question isn't whether or not Mk is broken?

*checks the OP*

 

[Biolink]

I see. Well then Ally Daigo is just an excellent player and this doesn't prove anything.

Just kidding.

There's still 8 Sagats in Japan's Top 15 Ranking, which is over 50%.

So what's the fuss about?

Here in America at Evo not a single one Sagat placed, and in Japan the best player is a Ryu among a bunch of Sagat's, so I'm not understanding the parallel between Sagat and Meta Knight that the other person tried to make about Sagat being soft banned(When he's not banned in the least anywhere around the globe) when people can still win using other characters when it actually matters(And I'm not talking about a dumb arcade ranking that nobody cares about or doesn't pay any kind of money).

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Anti-Ban stereo-typical response: No

Pro-Ban stereo-typical response: Yes

Troll: Cool story bro

The most correct comment of today my friend. Especially with trolling.

 

[OmniOstrich]

DDD wins if marth makes spacing errors really...

If DDD runs in at Marth and PS a fair he can do a shield cancel grab afterward, regardless of whether Marth does another fair, retreats, w/e.

 

[MarKO X]

So what's the fuss about?

Here in America at Evo not a single one Sagat placed, and in Japan the best player is a Ryu among a bunch of Sagat's, so I'm not understanding the parallel between Sagat and Meta Knight that the other person tried to make about Sagat being soft banned(When he's not banned in the least anywhere around the globe) when people can still win using other characters when it actually matters(And I'm not talking about a dumb arcade ranking that nobody cares about or doesn't pay any kind of money).

So because there were no Sagats in Evo's top 8, Sagat isn't a top character?
Especially when in Japan, there are top rankings that show Sagat's domination?
Especially when the SF community OBVIOUSLY cares about what's going on in Japan?

 

[Divinokage]

So what's the fuss about?

Here in America at Evo not a single one Sagat placed, and in Japan the best player is a Ryu among a bunch of Sagat's, so I'm not understanding the parallel between Sagat and Meta Knight that the other person tried to make about Sagat being soft banned(When he's not banned in the least anywhere around the globe) when people can still win using other characters when it actually matters(And I'm not talking about a dumb arcade ranking that nobody cares about or doesn't pay any kind of money).

Because Sagat got soft-banned at Evo..
2. Daigo is an exceptional player that can overcome anything..
3. No one else can by pass the 8 sagats in Top 15 lol in Japan.

That only means Sagat is stronger in MK in that sense or maybe Ally = Daigo?

 

[Fatmanonice]

LOL.
And its times like this pro-ban gets *****...

the question isn't whether or not Mk is broken?

*checks the OP*

Well, that's their fault for trying to cater to that viewpoint (ie; the only reason Metaknight should be banned is if he causes the metagame to come to a screeching halt.) The metagame has not done so because of him but it has severeally slowed down for everyone except a handful of characters (Snake, Diddy, Ice Climbers, and argueably Wario) simply because they aren't at a complete disadvantage against him.

 

[MarKO X]

lol
prove that Sagat was "soft-banned." This has been a rumor that I have not seen confirmed.

also, Daigo has been playing Street Fighter games for a very long time, so to compare him to Ally is kinda.... well... inconsistent imo.

 

[RDK]

Which is beside the point. Soft banned =/= hard banned.

 

[etecoon]

If DDD runs in at Marth and PS a fair he can do a shield cancel grab afterward, regardless of whether Marth does another fair, retreats, w/e.

so marth shouldn't fair in that situation, it's really not hard to predict what a DDD is after if he runs right after you like that, he only has a few viable options from a run as it is...

 

[Clai]

Let me ask something first, for everyone: Is Meta Knight broken when you've taken out stalling, planking, and IDC?

Edit: And I want a simple answer from everyone who sees this question, not a novel.

IDC and stalling (for the sake of stalling) are banned already, so we already took those out.

Even with stalling (the legal kind) and planking, Metaknight isn't broken.

So the simple answer is no.

I want to see more people on the anti-ban respond to this. Avaricepanda's the only one who has taken a stab at this despite it probably being the best arguement for the pro-ban side in like 100 pages. RDK, want to try your hand at it?

Add in: Oh and if you want to respond to the original post, go to page 391.

*sigh* Really long post, I'll get to it when I have time. Should be later tonight, though.

 

[da K.I.D.]

You mean much like how the Devil is outclassed by the Super Devil?

Somebody please get this joke, please... -_-

that motorcycle and fornication jam was too much

 

[da K.I.D.]

Let me ask something first, for everyone: Is Meta Knight broken when you've taken out stalling, planking, and IDC?

Edit: And I want a simple answer from everyone who sees this question, not a novel.

no. but my issue is that theres really no way to effectively take away those abilitys from MK anymore

 

[Divinokage]

Which is beside the point. Soft banned =/= hard banned.

True but I was just trying to suggest some alternatives.

 

[Biolink]

So because there were no Sagats in Evo's top 8, Sagat isn't a top character?
Especially when in Japan, there are top rankings that show Sagat's domination?
Especially when the SF community OBVIOUSLY cares about what's going on in Japan?

Who said Sagat wasn't top?

I know he dominates a lot

Nobody in the Street Fighter community is complaining about Sagat though, like the Smash community is with Meta Knight.

That's the difference of mentality between the Smash and SF community.

Because Sagat got soft-banned at Evo..
2. Daigo is an exceptional player that can overcome anything..
3. No one else can by pass the 8 sagats in Top 15 lol in Japan.

That only means Sagat is stronger in MK in that sense or maybe Ally = Daigo?

Who in the bloody hell spread this dumb rumor that Sagat was soft banned at Evo. Sagat IS NOT BANNED at any level of play within the SF community. He dominate like any Top tier, but he is beatable. It's a lot more about player skill rather than character choice in SF4.

 

[AvaricePanda]

The question isn't whether or not Metaknight is broken. As said by many people (including myself), many times, he is not broken if you by competitive standards. The question is whether or not, for a game like Brawl, keeping him around is harmful for the metagame and offline competitive lifespan of the game overall. In short, is Metaknight determental to the community?

Going by the evidence we have right now, no.

If your argument isn't that MK isn't broken enough for a ban but keeping him in might be bad for the metagame and lifespan in the game, then...

Over the past half year when people have been arguing about MK, the "problem" has gotten better. His tournament dominance and results have dropped, and more match-ups are going slightly into his favor. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that MK will start dominating again and corrupt the metagame, so there's absolutely no reason to ban him.

by that argument.

 

[da K.I.D.]

That's the difference of mentality between the Smash and SF community.

Or maybe thats just the difference in abilities between the characters in smash below MK and the characters in SF below sagat....

i mean like, you cant just assume that kind of stuff

 

[kr3wman]

Who said Sagat wasn't top?

I know he dominates a lot

Nobody in the Street Fighter community is complaining about Sagat though, like the Smash community is with Meta Knight.

That's the difference of mentality between the Smash and SF community.

People complain for everything, It's just that people in the Smash community don't shut up about it.

EDIT : omg your sig join the hokuto no ken fanclub lulz it's been dead for a while, we need new members.

 

[MarKO X]

lol
there are plenty of difference between Sagat and MK. Wanna try me?

 

[Biolink]

Or maybe thats just the difference in abilities between the characters in smash below MK and the characters in SF below sagat....

i mean like, you cant just assume that kind of stuff

Who knows. I don't play Brawl and stopped playing Melee a while ago.

The data I see for the Anti-Ban side wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be however. Looks like nothing more than God Tier character domination to me(Yun, & Chun 3s anyone?)

lol
there are plenty of difference between Sagat and MK. Wanna try me?

Of course there will be plenty of difference just based on the nature of the physics of both games alone. Meta Knight having virutally no recovery time at all or lag after his attacks, etc, etc, and Sagat just being a good **** character overall because of easiness of use, etc, etc...

YOu can go ahead and list the differences if you want. Doesn't make sense to me, because due to the nature of the games of course Sagat is going to have more lag and recovery time after his attacks and whatnot.

 

[DanGR]

Who said Sagat wasn't top?

I know he dominates a lot

Nobody in the Street Fighter community is complaining about Sagat though, like the Smash community is with Meta Knight.

That's the difference of mentality between the Smash and SF community.

I think it'd be different if Sagat straight up bypassed several staples of competitive SF like, you know, Meta Knight does to Smash.

 

[POKE40]

Who knows. I don't play Brawl and stopped playing Melee a while ago.

The data I see for the Anti-Ban side wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be however. Looks like nothing more than God Tier character domination to me.

Stopped playing melee?!
That is a terrible mistake son. /sarcasm

What did you vote?

 

[MarKO X]

lol @ people thinking Sagat is easy to use.

 

[infomon]

I assume you were adressing the post a few posts up that wasn't mine... but I want to reply to this too, by saying I totally agree. We made it a competitive game, and the rules we created to govern it are independent to smash, which is why I said that since the rules were developed "solely for smash, with smash in mind" that longstanding convention of looking at THIS game should still stand. Take pointers/ideas from other games, but by no means create standards based solely on those other games.

The "standards" of these other games aren't arbitrary or irrelevant, though. They're the metaphysical viewpoint that if you're doing something as serious as banning a character, they darn well better be broken. They should be dominant, and high-level gameplay degenerate to pick-that-char-or-lose. If the char is banned without being broken, it is an immense disservice to all the people that play, especially the people who happened to have chosen that main. It's a matter of decency and respect.

I want to see more people on the anti-ban respond to this. Avaricepanda's the only one who has taken a stab at this despite it probably being the best arguement for the pro-ban side in like 100 pages.

at first I didn't find it outstanding, but you're right actually it was pretty good. I'll take a stab.

On the subject of over-centralization:

Everything that was said here could still be said of any one char being "the best". And that there's a lot of "talk" about MK being the best; especially amongst kids who have heard about how MK is so "broken" and love to troll forums, rather than ppl who are actually out there fighting and placing in tournaments.

There's little dissention that MK is the best in Brawl. Perhaps he doesn't even have any disadvantageous matchups. But that alone doesn't imply he's broken or ban-worthy. A number of characters can and do have quite reasonable odds against MK; and often an MK opponent may well have better matchup odds against you by selecting a diff char than using MK.

On The Subject Of "Quit Crying and Get Better Scrubs"

I think that it is safe to say that people HAVE been trying to get better. The time and effort people have put into analyzing the MK matchup should be PLENTY enough evidence to support the concerted effort of the community to "get better". In essence, the former point leads to this one: If MK *HASN'T* been over-centralizing the game, then WHY has there been so much concerted effort to find ways to BEAT him. And, the fact that such time and effort has been put into finding ways to beat him directly translates to people TRYING TO GET BETTER.

And people have been getting better. Brawl's still a young game. MK is an amazing character at wrecking people who don't know how to play well; ex. tornado spam. It works if you don't know how to beat it. But as for bans, we don't care how much of a learning curve there is to being able to beat MK; the question is whether or not at a high-level of play he is beatable. At a high level, people DI shuttle loop and often get out of and/or punish tornado. If it took us a long time to get to that point, it doesn't matter. If there are 1000 threads about it on smashboards, it doesn't matter. The question is whether or not it's beatable, or degenerate. Show me vids where people lose to MK not because they weren't making mistakes, but because his traps are virtually perfect. At least in reasonable trade with some mistakes made by the MK.

MK has largely centralized the metagame, to this point (and prolly for longer still). Centralizing =/= over-centralizing. It's okay for things to be central, if it takes us that long to overcome the obstacles necessary to reach high-level play.

Also, the former point leads to this one: there HAS been such an effort to "find a way to beat Metaknight" that some people (individually), and some groups/character boards altogether have become unfocused on their other matchups. This leads to a lack of knowledge of said MU all across the board (some more than others) and can lead to players boxing themselves in and getting bracket-blocked by characters they shouldn't.

So the game has a high learning curve. Sounds good to me. Lots of matchups, lots of unique situations to explore. MK's the most important to learn, but that's not surprising; I mean, every game has a best character.

On The Subject Of Character Diversity:

Triangle counters do happen in Brawl. A number of chars do reasonably well vs MK, and a MK may have a better chance against you by picking someone else. Lots of ppl don't play MK still. And having more "triangle counter" situations doesn't automatically yield more character diversity; we might just have a tighter circle of high-tiers. I'm a Sonic main, and I would much rather fight a MK than a Snake or Wario, or Falco depending on stage.

On The Subject Of MK is beatable
(...)
He lives much longer than his weight should allow when momentum cancelling/DI are taken into account. The "weight to percent KO'd" ratio, if I were to hazard a guess is superior to any character which neutralizes the built in trade off between maneuverability/small size vs ability to live.

huh? MK's momentum-cancelling options are pretty trash. His jumps barely help recover any horizontal momentum, his only real options are U-air > glide-attack which doesn't help much, or side-B which pretty much guarantees he dies anyway. MK is very light, everyone can DI, and I'd reckon at least half the cast can momentum-cancel better than he.

MK does not have a projectile, but his small stature, multiple jumps, option to powershield (universally available) and overall speed make getting around most projectiles child's play. In essence, he trumps projectiles (a generally defensive tactic) with his offense. The only exceptions I can think of are grenades, bananas, and (Falco) lasers.

Because of MK's categorically unique priority mechanics, he has an inherent weakness to projectiles. It doesn't help that much in practice, yet, but I think it's a bit early to say that avoiding projectiles is "child's play". (err, modulo the fact that we're talking about a children's videogame )

Put all of this together, and you get a VERY, VERY good character. I concede that MK is beatable, but he is beatable not because of one character having implicit advantages over him, but because the player using MK has to make a mistake. To me, the character is designed as "perfectly" (in terms of being designed to be dominant) as one could hope for.

Judging myself from his frame data, I think you're probably right; that MK is only beatable if he makes a mistake. He is probably perfect; that is, a robot playing an MK perfectly would necessarily win, including all effects of random chance. However, it's just not what we see in practice, so we can't simply make this assertion. Snakes and other chars are, in practice, reasonably holding their own against MK, even if it is at a disadvantage. It's possible that MK isn't the only "theoretically perfect" char in the game; that is, theoretical robot-optimal gameplay would by necessity reduce to zero KOs with the exception of interference from random encounters, which it's possible could go either way even in perfect play).

So I'm not comfortable, this early on, saying we have proof that he's the perfect character and can't/won't allow other characters to place top. It is sociomorally wrong for us to decide this too early; it's a slap in the face to everyone who's put in time both to playing MK and to beating MK. So let's exercise due caution and wait until MK's learn to stop losing. Since MK shouldn't lose.

You will occasionally see a well-known MK losing to a char that he should destroy, but we only see the posted result in text form, and not the match itself in its entirety ("real life" things that may affect the player). Was thehe MK player could have been playing badly? Or was the opponent playing exceptionally well? Did the MK player SD at a low percent? A myriad of things can explain this.

This is a very good point. We need vids -- ie. solid, debatable evidence -- where MK's are winning, and in particular, losing. So let's get on this! Yay data collection! I want to see that the only way MK can lose a game is if he makes a critical mistake. That is, reduce competitive brawl to a single-player game. It's quite possible that this can be done, and when we have solid evidence to this effect, then I could agree to a ban (and I am firmly no-ban atm).

Then we could ban MK and pronounce to the world, "Here is why. There's are our videos that give evidence that MK is absolutely dominant, unbeatable if played correctly." Then we could RIP that if anything new ever comes up, we'll know what MK was like in his prime, and be able to reconcile whether or not the ban was premature. It will allow us to explain why we made the ban to newcomers, and ppl all over the world who don't experience the same metagame as here. etc....

Of course, I want the same sort of "proof-evidence" done for all the stages we ban as well, since I'm not a scrub. But sadly, that's apparently asking way too much of all our ban-happy brawlers and even our "self-proclaimed leaders", the secretive SBR

On The Subject Of "Ally/M2K"
(...)
Ally has beaten legit people with Captain Falcon, does that mean Captain Falcon is suddenly leagues better than the matchup discussions and assessments make him out to be? No. He beat them because he is a vastly superior player.

Anther's sonic doesn't count.
My sonic doesn't either
Who is Ally beating with his Falcon? imo his falcon's not even all that good, I'm just particularly bad lol... His falcon's deffo beatable. no offense ally

And are you saying that Ally is "vastly superior" to M2K?? Because I really don't think that's the case. You don't have to be vastly superior to a MK to win; in the current metagame, at least.

Pointing to Ally/M2k as an example for either side is, imo, folly. Because, while they are playing at an obscene level, it is clear that 98% of the players (even regular/well-known) tournament attendees will never reach this level, for a myriad of reasons.

It is absolutely possible for you to play as well as M2K or Ally. No johns. If our highest level of play doesn't support a ban, then that means we all need to get better. Because I'm pretty sure the highest level of play can extend beyond what ppl know about Brawl right now. There's more to this game than we've explored, good players still mess up basic stuff and tons of matchups have barely been explored at all.


DuLL_RaZer you have some very good arguments, it was a good read. Sorry for my long reply lol... blame fatmanonice.

 

[Pikaville]

The pro ban sides argument its much better and pretty much ticks all the boxes for bannibility.

But....

Im going to vote no because banning him would steer the community the wrong way.I reckon alot of players would quit if he were gotten rid of.

He is good,but not unbeatable,therefore man up and beat him.

BTW above post is very good,compelling and rich.But seriously well worded and has some fantastic points.

 

[Palpi]

The pro ban sides argument its much better and pretty much ticks all the boxes for bannibility.

But....

Im going to vote no because banning him would steer the community the wrong way.I reckon alot of players would quit if he were gotten rid of.

He is good,but not unbeatable,therefore man up and beat him.

BTW above post is very good,compelling and rich.But seriously well worded and has some fantastic points.

If he is beatable he's not bannable.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Going by the evidence we have right now, no.

If your argument isn't that MK isn't broken enough for a ban but keeping him in might be bad for the metagame and lifespan in the game, then...

Over the past half year when people have been arguing about MK, the "problem" has gotten better. His tournament dominance and results have dropped, and more match-ups are going slightly into his favor. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that MK will start dominating again and corrupt the metagame, so there's absolutely no reason to ban him.

by that argument.

Things have become slightly better but, if we were to be completely honest with ourselves, it has much more to do with Ally rising up to become a dominant player and basically going back and forth with M2K in major touraments instead of M2K losing in one time occurances like Ninjalink beating him with Diddy and Lain beating him with the Ice Climbers instead of the discovery of anything that knocks Metaknight down a peg. As Razer pointed out, a lot of things have come as potential counter strategies but just about all of them have fallen by the wayside or become much less effective like grab releases into ftilt/utilt with Snake or Ice Block locks with the Ice Climbers (as Metaknight has one of the shortest "bounces" when stuck in a lock of the whole cast). In other words, the lead that Metaknight has in front of Snake has mostly shortened because M2k has consistent competition in Ally but, even then, Metaknight still has more than double the rankings that Snake has and triple when it comes to major tournaments.

Basically, Metaknight's no longer 1000 points ahead of Snake like he was back in October (he's about 500 at the moment and 1,200 in front of Falco's who's in third) but the lead that he has over the rest of the cast has virtually been unchanged since last Summer with all the high tier characters rising and falling to different positions. Currently, the Ice Climbers are rising, Diddy's fallen, Pit, Lucario, Mr. Game and Watch, Olimar and King Dedede have taken nose dives and Kirby, Falco, Wario, ROB, and Marth have risen not because they are doing better against MK but because some of the characters I mentioned (King Dedede being the big one) have fallen so much. Again, it points to a metagame that truely hasn't developed that much in the past year except for a few characters (most noteably Metaknight and Snake).

 

[bobson]

If he is beatable he's not bannable.

Akuma is beatable.

 

[Palpi]

Akuma is beatable.

At the same level of play, smart ***.

 

[SaiX]

smashboards is full of scrubs

i voted NO obviously

 

[orange/xd]

^lol......

 

[POKE40]

smashboards is full of scrubs

That is an inaccurate statement.

It should be:

smashboards Brawl is full of scrubs.

However the statement is still inaccurate.
You don't want to make fun of yourself since you probably play brawl.

smashboards Brawl has is full a lotof scrubs.

But if you were an anti-ban stereo-typical guy, you would do the following:

smashboards Brawl has is full a lotof scrubs that can't beat MK.

However if you were a pro-ban stereo-typical guy, you would have said the following:

smashboards Brawl has is full a lotof scrubs because of Meta Knight.

Oh btw.
Cool story bro
/zomgutroll




On topic:
Why is there so many references to SF?

*curiousity

 

['V']

POKE40, you're awesome.

 

[Fatmanonice]

51 top8, 38 top4, 21 top2, 15 wins) - 1223.9
(31 top8, 12 top4, 8 top2, 14 wins) - 753.9
(14 top8, 7 top4, 5 top2, 2 wins) - 207.1


I just wanted to post these.

Metaknight- 125 placings
Snake- 66 placings
Falco- 28 placings

Basically, I'm just adding this to the statement I made earlier about how things really haven't changed that much.

 

[Matador]

The distance between MK and Snake in tourney rankings is the same as Snake to the next person behind him (Falco)

Edit: Just says something about the balance of this game.

 

[Fatmanonice]

The distance between MK and Snake in tourney rankings is the same as Snake to the next person behind him (Falco)

Edit: Just says something about the balance of this game.

But when you look at the person behind Falco.

Diddy Kong (18 top8, 8 top4, 6 top2, 2 wins) - 184.5 - 3

34 placings.

He has 6 more placings than Falco but he's still lower. Still, all in all, Falco's only about 20 points ahead of Diddy.

Granted, the game is by no means balanced but I don't think anybody would disagree that it's a tad bit stupid about how unbalanced it is right at the moment. Metaknight has about 5 times the number of placings then the person that's in third, that's kind of crazy if you ask me.

 

[MarKO X]

On topic:
Why is there so many references to SF?

*curiousity

Because SF is also a fighting game.
Because SF has been around about 10 years longer than Smash.
Because SF is that sh*t.
Because everyone who ever held a joystick or played SF2 on their SNES thinks they're an SF expert.

 

[Syde7]

The "standards" of these other games aren't arbitrary or irrelevant, though. They're the metaphysical viewpoint that if you're doing something as serious as banning a character, they darn well better be broken. They should be dominant, and high-level gameplay degenerate to pick-that-char-or-lose. If the char is banned without being broken, it is an immense disservice to all the people that play, especially the people who happened to have chosen that main. It's a matter of decency and respect.

Of course they aren't totally irrelevant. I just think that a lot of the anti-ban sign sees another game, sees how that community deals with things, and say "That is how it should be for Smash" without so much as a second thought as to WHY. I am merely asserting that any decision made, be in to ban, or not to ban, be made by the same standards as anything else we have banned; stages, items, techniques, etc.

If the decision to keep MK around is made with the SBR sitting down and saying: "This is what smash is, as we (the 'ruling body' for lack of a better term) have defined it in terms of what is and isn't fair and level competition" and comes up with keeping him around- then I am fine with that decision (I may not like it, but I can accept it) as opposed to them sitting down and saying "Well, in SF or GG there is this one char who... and, MK isn't like that, so we aren't going to ban him" then I will be... to some degree upset.

Essentially, I want the decision to be made in the context of smash as it has been defined. Being influenced is one thing, looking to some precedent is one thing- but to make such a weight decision simply because "it worked/didnt work" for ANOTHER community is something I disagree with.

All I'm asking is that pro and anti ban alike assess it from the POV of the SMASH community.

Everything that was said here could still be said of any one char being "the best". And that there's a lot of "talk" about MK being the best; especially amongst kids who have heard about how MK is so "broken" and love to troll forums, rather than ppl who are actually out there fighting and placing in tournaments.

Avarice Panda mentioned something like this, and I just want to point out that its not that the traits are inherent in any "best character" but rather that THIS "best character" is apparantly leagues ahead of the others. (Referring to the tier list & explanation of how the tiers were broken down). Though the gap has closed, it seems to be wider than any the community has experienced.


And people have been getting better. Brawl's still a young game. MK is an amazing character at wrecking people who don't know how to play well; ex. tornado spam. It works if you don't know how to beat it. But as for bans, we don't care how much of a learning curve there is to being able to beat MK; the question is whether or not at a high-level of play he is beatable. At a high level, people DI shuttle loop and often get out of and/or punish tornado. If it took us a long time to get to that point, it doesn't matter. If there are 1000 threads about it on smashboards, it doesn't matter. The question is whether or not it's beatable, or degenerate. Show me vids where people lose to MK not because they weren't making mistakes, but because his traps are virtually perfect. At least in reasonable trade with some mistakes made by the MK.

Example of trap: U-air-->opponent airdodges-->D-air, its a frame trap. Of course, other chars have other frame traps. A lot of "tricks" with MK result in frame traps like multiple shuttleloops, drill rushes ending with a platform cancel, the frame advantage MK has over shields and airdodges, etc etc. Its not so much that these traps exist, but its that they buff already very good moves.

For a more obvious example, look at any match that an MK has won due to stalling out the clock, be it by ledge or "air" camping. His options more or less create "traps" against some chars that result in them being unable to reasonably do anything.

MK has largely centralized the metagame, to this point (and prolly for longer still). Centralizing =/= over-centralizing. It's okay for things to be central, if it takes us that long to overcome the obstacles necessary to reach high-level play.

huh? MK's momentum-cancelling options are pretty trash. His jumps barely help recover any horizontal momentum, his only real options are U-air > glide-attack which doesn't help much, or side-B which pretty much guarantees he dies anyway. MK is very light, everyone can DI, and I'd reckon at least half the cast can momentum-cancel better than he.

Then explain why in the world MK can live as into the mid-high hundreds when comparably weighted chars don't? And, I don't mean that as a smart-arse comment, I'm just curious.

Because of MK's categorically unique priority mechanics, he has an inherent weakness to projectiles. It doesn't help that much in practice, yet, but I think it's a bit early to say that avoiding projectiles is "child's play". (err, modulo the fact that we're talking about a children's videogame )

The point I was trying to make is that MK both shuts down approaches, and can approach much easier than other characters facing the same projectile onslaught.

Judging myself from his frame data, I think you're probably right; that MK is only beatable if he makes a mistake. He is probably perfect; that is, a robot playing an MK perfectly would necessarily win, including all effects of random chance. However, it's just not what we see in practice, so we can't simply make this assertion. Snakes and other chars are, in practice, reasonably holding their own against MK, even if it is at a disadvantage. It's possible that MK isn't the only "theoretically perfect" char in the game; that is, theoretical robot-optimal gameplay would by necessity reduce to zero KOs with the exception of interference from random encounters, which it's possible could go either way even in perfect play).

This is an interesting point. The "human factor" does come into play, but we have to realize that just as the MK can make a mistake, the other player can as well. And, most MU discussions/ratios are more or less based on the assumption that "these are the things you need to do, and you have to do these right". While they take account for human error, they do so minimally, inasmuch as: "If you space this poorly, you'll get hit with this". Because of the stringent nature of the discussion concerning how matchups are to be played... it seems somewhat impractical to call *any* matchup in terms of a ratio (which I rarely ever do). I was merely using the term "perfect character" to illustrate that if someone played him 100% accuratley, they would never lose in theory, something that, to my knowledge, can't be said about any other character/matchup.

This is a very good point. We need vids -- ie. solid, debatable evidence -- where MK's are winning, and in particular, losing. So let's get on this! Yay data collection! I want to see that the only way MK can lose a game is if he makes a critical mistake. That is, reduce competitive brawl to a single-player game. It's quite possible that this can be done, and when we have solid evidence to this effect, then I could agree to a ban (and I am firmly no-ban atm).

Then we could ban MK and pronounce to the world, "Here is why. There's are our videos that give evidence that MK is absolutely dominant, unbeatable if played correctly." Then we could RIP that if anything new ever comes up, we'll know what MK was like in his prime, and be able to reconcile whether or not the ban was premature. It will allow us to explain why we made the ban to newcomers, and ppl all over the world who don't experience the same metagame as here. etc....

Of course, I want the same sort of "proof-evidence" done for all the stages we ban as well, since I'm not a scrub. But sadly, that's apparently asking way too much of all our ban-happy brawlers and even our "self-proclaimed leaders", the secretive SBR

And are you saying that Ally is "vastly superior" to M2K?? Because I really don't think that's the case. You don't have to be vastly superior to a MK to win; in the current metagame, at least.

No, not at all! I think the two are incredibly even. I was just saying that the performance of two players, even though they are the best, do not single-handedly rewrite matchups unless it is a continued trend (IE, more than a handful or two of sets)

DuLL_RaZer you have some very good arguments, it was a good read. Sorry for my long reply lol... blame fatmanonice.

Good stuff from you as well... and like I told Avarice- you bring up some interesting points that made me ponder. Good stuff.

 

[POKE40]

Because SF is also a fighting game.
Because SF has been around about 10 years longer than Smash.
Because SF is that sh*t.
Because everyone who ever held a joystick or played SF2 on their SNES thinks they're an SF expert.

Oh.
Thanks

I truly suck at SF games so I didn't know.
X(

 

[Master Knight DH]

You know what I find ironic? People acting like Meta Knight is more broken than freaking Caulder in Advance Wars: Days of Ruin.

Let's compare/contrast the two since people insist on acting that way:
*Number of attributes:
-DoR COs generally have maybe only 1 or 2 attributes. Total.
-SSBB characters have various attributes
*Weaknesses:
-DoR COs besides Caulder have no weaknesses.
-SSBB characters in general have weaknesses, but in general they are priority issues, killing issues, recovery issues, react-to-being-hit issues, or *slight* melee range issues. The closest things to being on-balance weaknesses in that list are priority and melee range issues.
*"God tier" weaknesses
-Caulder actually has a weakness, for all the good it does the other COs who can't exploit it easily at all because it's an OFF-balance weakness
-Meta Knight actually has an on-balance weakness in his lack of projectiles in a game where about 3/4 of the characters has projectiles.
*"God tier" strengths
-Caulder provides ridiculous power and repairs to zone units
-Meta Knight has OTT priority and.....I'm not sure what else that could be glaring, really.

Self-quoting again. This is the second time I had to do so.