GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
They must be massive Gimpyfish fans to think Bowser is the best in Brawl.
-
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!
Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.
- Thread starter Marc
- Start date
- Status
Genome Squirrel
Smash Apprentice
In all fairness, it's an internet poll. Nuff said.
Alus
Smash Champion
Alus
Smash Champion
Gimpy still plays brawl?
Red Arremer
Smash Legend
No. I said I was done.
GunmasterLombardi
Smash Champion
No, he stopped playing for a year now. He just best known for using Bowser in Melee.-_-
Hobobloke
Atemon Game
Finally someone has seen the light, come forth my child do not be afraid.
AvaricePanda
Smash Lord
Amidst all of this off-topicness, my really long post on page 169 that took quite a while to type was ignored.
._.
._.
Alus
Smash Champion
omg doood wtf yez he iz wtf u talkin bout gtfo scrub ur such a n00b omg sutf fgt u just suck
EDIT: DAMMIT! I succeeded in one part of punctuation... FAIL
*deletes period*
ShinoBee
Smash Apprentice
lol creepy guy is gonna kidnap me! I shall use my Peach Bomb on you!
But wait since Bowser is best, shouldn't we ban him instead?! D:
Alus
Smash Champion
Ban Mario...
He clearly beats bowser like 99-01
He clearly beats bowser like 99-01
Titanium Dragon
Smash Journeyman
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
- Messages
- 247
Well, firstly, the first ban side argument is a scrub argument. Neither are viable criteria for banning. ACTUAL criteria for banning are:
1) The game ceases to be competitive (basically, the game devolves down to one, possibly random, thing).
2) The game ceases to have variety (Akuma).
3) The game ceases to function (any glitch which makes the game not work at all).
Now, obviously 1 is false - the game is still competitive, and metaknight vs metaknight matches are still real matches, as are most matches with metaknight.
3 is also false - while the infinite dimensional cape glitch CAN render MK invulnerable forever, it is banned. It is arguable that certain things MK is capable of can cause similar issues (planking), MK is not the only character who can do it, just the best at it. Reality is that planking is broken because of the invisibility mechanics of the ledges, and its not a MK specific issue. We had to ban a number of stages due to circle camping, and indeed, if we were to go by the "makes stuff be banned" argument, the #1 offender would not be MK, but rather DeDeDe, who requires us to, by himself, ban every stage with walk-off edges. This is, incidentally, part of the reason that MK is so strong - we banned a lot of stages to deal with DeDeDe which are MK's worst. It doesn't help that the netural stagelist is a bad one - several stages which should be in the neutral stagelist aren't due to scrubby dislike of them.
2 is the real argument, then - overcentralization. And if we look at this argument, it is weak.
22% is a lot, but the idea that it is compared to "36 characters" is just plain wrong. Some characters are multi-characters (shiek/zelda and samus/zss) and some are borderline (Pokemon Trainer). However, the real issue is that all 36 characters will NEVER be viable. At least two of them - Ganondorf and Link - have such crippling weaknesses as to render them virtually unplayable. DK is not mainable because of King DeDeDe, and it is arguable that Bowser is not mainable as well for the same reason, but both are playable in tournaments under the right conditions. So really, you're looking at 32 characters who are really mainable. And it is arguable that the number of unplayable characters is more like 4 or 6.
Beyond that, however, there will always be a best character, and some characters will always be overrepresented relative to others. If you were to ban MK, Snake would make up at least 17% of the metagame, which is not all that much less than 22%. Obviously DeDeDe is far lower, but the same argument could be applied against snake as metaknight - so clearly, just making up 22% is not enough. Moreover, in other games (SSBM, for example), some characters have historically and do make up a huge percentage of the metagame, particularly Fox, Falco, Shiek, and Marth, and at various times have been quite dominant.
Is Metaknight the best character in the game by a significant margin? Sure. But that's not really important. There will ALWAYS be a best character, and oftentimes it will be by an appreciable margin. Ban MK, and Snake will be best. The difference between DeDeDe and the next character is much smaller than the difference between Snake and DeDeDe, and indeed the difference between MK and Snake is smaller than the difference between Snake and DeDeDe. MK is not unbeatably better.
Metaknight does not have perfect recovery. He has extremely good recovery, the best in the game, but there are ways of disrupting it. He can be edgeguarded, but not in the same way as everyone else. There are ways of hitting him out of every single move he has, including the tornado.
As for the argument that MK has no counterpicks, it is arguable that he does indeed have some, such as Diddy, and really, if MK really WAS so good, we'd expect a much higher level of dominance than we see. Not every top calibur player does play MK, which is precisely what they should be doing if he truly is the best. This means that, in some way, they don't think he's a better choice than whatever they are playing, for whatever reason. This does not necessarily mean that he is not the best character in the game, but rather that they feel that he is not the best choice for them to play.
The community favoring the ban is irrelevant, as much of the community is made up of scrubs. Tons of CounterStrike servers ban the AWP, but that doesn't mean it SHOULD be banned - it means a lot of people suck at counterstrike and/or blame their problems on something other than their own lack of skill. Scrubs are scrubs, and tournaments are for competitive play, not for scrubby play.
As for the MK specific rules, the ONLY MK specific rule is the IDC glitch. But it isn't the only character-specific rule. For example, stages with permanent walk-off edges are banned due to DeDeDe (which, incidentally, gives MK a further advantage, because the stages on which his recovery and edgegame are worse are mostly banned), the "kill at 300%" rule exists due to just a small number of things (DeDeDe, ICs), and stalling and planking are not unique to MK - a number of characters can stall or plank, and indeed, we had to ban all of the stages on which "circle camping" is possible for exactly this reason.
Ease of use is, obviously, a meaningless piece of data, and is scrub talk anyway - it doesn't matter how easy something is it use, what matters is how effectively you can use it. CGing with DeDeDe is incredibly easy; does that mean we should ban DeDeDe? No.
I'm not sure why this conversation is even being had. I know the community is incredibly scrubby; EVERYONE knows this except the scrubs in it.
1) The game ceases to be competitive (basically, the game devolves down to one, possibly random, thing).
2) The game ceases to have variety (Akuma).
3) The game ceases to function (any glitch which makes the game not work at all).
Now, obviously 1 is false - the game is still competitive, and metaknight vs metaknight matches are still real matches, as are most matches with metaknight.
3 is also false - while the infinite dimensional cape glitch CAN render MK invulnerable forever, it is banned. It is arguable that certain things MK is capable of can cause similar issues (planking), MK is not the only character who can do it, just the best at it. Reality is that planking is broken because of the invisibility mechanics of the ledges, and its not a MK specific issue. We had to ban a number of stages due to circle camping, and indeed, if we were to go by the "makes stuff be banned" argument, the #1 offender would not be MK, but rather DeDeDe, who requires us to, by himself, ban every stage with walk-off edges. This is, incidentally, part of the reason that MK is so strong - we banned a lot of stages to deal with DeDeDe which are MK's worst. It doesn't help that the netural stagelist is a bad one - several stages which should be in the neutral stagelist aren't due to scrubby dislike of them.
2 is the real argument, then - overcentralization. And if we look at this argument, it is weak.
22% is a lot, but the idea that it is compared to "36 characters" is just plain wrong. Some characters are multi-characters (shiek/zelda and samus/zss) and some are borderline (Pokemon Trainer). However, the real issue is that all 36 characters will NEVER be viable. At least two of them - Ganondorf and Link - have such crippling weaknesses as to render them virtually unplayable. DK is not mainable because of King DeDeDe, and it is arguable that Bowser is not mainable as well for the same reason, but both are playable in tournaments under the right conditions. So really, you're looking at 32 characters who are really mainable. And it is arguable that the number of unplayable characters is more like 4 or 6.
Beyond that, however, there will always be a best character, and some characters will always be overrepresented relative to others. If you were to ban MK, Snake would make up at least 17% of the metagame, which is not all that much less than 22%. Obviously DeDeDe is far lower, but the same argument could be applied against snake as metaknight - so clearly, just making up 22% is not enough. Moreover, in other games (SSBM, for example), some characters have historically and do make up a huge percentage of the metagame, particularly Fox, Falco, Shiek, and Marth, and at various times have been quite dominant.
Is Metaknight the best character in the game by a significant margin? Sure. But that's not really important. There will ALWAYS be a best character, and oftentimes it will be by an appreciable margin. Ban MK, and Snake will be best. The difference between DeDeDe and the next character is much smaller than the difference between Snake and DeDeDe, and indeed the difference between MK and Snake is smaller than the difference between Snake and DeDeDe. MK is not unbeatably better.
Metaknight does not have perfect recovery. He has extremely good recovery, the best in the game, but there are ways of disrupting it. He can be edgeguarded, but not in the same way as everyone else. There are ways of hitting him out of every single move he has, including the tornado.
As for the argument that MK has no counterpicks, it is arguable that he does indeed have some, such as Diddy, and really, if MK really WAS so good, we'd expect a much higher level of dominance than we see. Not every top calibur player does play MK, which is precisely what they should be doing if he truly is the best. This means that, in some way, they don't think he's a better choice than whatever they are playing, for whatever reason. This does not necessarily mean that he is not the best character in the game, but rather that they feel that he is not the best choice for them to play.
The community favoring the ban is irrelevant, as much of the community is made up of scrubs. Tons of CounterStrike servers ban the AWP, but that doesn't mean it SHOULD be banned - it means a lot of people suck at counterstrike and/or blame their problems on something other than their own lack of skill. Scrubs are scrubs, and tournaments are for competitive play, not for scrubby play.
As for the MK specific rules, the ONLY MK specific rule is the IDC glitch. But it isn't the only character-specific rule. For example, stages with permanent walk-off edges are banned due to DeDeDe (which, incidentally, gives MK a further advantage, because the stages on which his recovery and edgegame are worse are mostly banned), the "kill at 300%" rule exists due to just a small number of things (DeDeDe, ICs), and stalling and planking are not unique to MK - a number of characters can stall or plank, and indeed, we had to ban all of the stages on which "circle camping" is possible for exactly this reason.
Ease of use is, obviously, a meaningless piece of data, and is scrub talk anyway - it doesn't matter how easy something is it use, what matters is how effectively you can use it. CGing with DeDeDe is incredibly easy; does that mean we should ban DeDeDe? No.
I'm not sure why this conversation is even being had. I know the community is incredibly scrubby; EVERYONE knows this except the scrubs in it.
superyoshi888
Smash Lord
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2008
- Messages
- 1,026
Titanium Dragon, I love you. That is the best post made in the whole thread.
BBQTV
Smash Master
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2009
- Messages
- 4,000
magnificent
Me and avarice and spadefox said this more than 1 time, pro ban just never answered these arguments.
Red Arremer
Smash Legend
Alus
Smash Champion
I remember reading similar posts over 12 times...
I'm marking this post in case I have to bring this up again...
Nice work!
Alus
Smash Champion
What the hey...
Its a long document, i could do it, but im wondering if people are gonna read it. So yeah >.<
I got to burn/install windows 7 ultimate on my laptop either way, so if i have time during installation, anyone wants me to do it?
D. Disciple
Smash Master
I'll read it
Alus
Smash Champion
I'll make them read it...
Alright then i will.I'll make them read it...
Just gimme a few mins to actually start setuping my computer, then il be completely destroying his list of reasons XD.
Fatmanonice
Banned via Warnings
I'm debating whether or not to rebuttal Dragon's post because it's stuff that's been talked about already as early as like the first dozen pages. It's already been revealed that the community's vote has already been negated and that the anti-ban side already leads by a significant margin in the SBR. On top of that, it's been revealed that the SBR wants to make this a closed doors discussion for the rest of this game's lifespan so, obviously, things will never change. Because of this, I can't truly even debate anymore because my side has already lost so and the mere mention of this would make any arguement I make moot points. With that in mind, should I keep feeding this farce of a fire or should I simply become lethargic to what ever happens to offline competitive Brawl? Really, I personally don't lose anything if offline Brawl collapses but I know a majority of the people here would rather be teabagged by Donkey Kong than play Brawl online as it's questionable if BBrawl and Brawl+ will ever have a strong offline tournament following because of the complications of hacking so... *lights a cigarette and then eats it*
stabbedbyanipple
Smash Master
Pfft, use 40ppp.
MarKO X
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 2,542
- Location
- Brooklyn
- NNID
- legendnumberM
- 3DS FC
- 2595-2072-2390
- Switch FC
- 531664639998
i love how titanium dragon's regurgitation of **** that has been said before is this magnificent post
but no one really understands that MetaKnight is kept from being played at full potential...
how can I show the truth?
but no one really understands that MetaKnight is kept from being played at full potential...
how can I show the truth?
AvaricePanda
Smash Lord
By getting hard evidence instead of spouting random theory that goes against the evidence we already have.
da K.I.D.
Smash Hero
that resized part... yea, pretty much that
Fighting game communities as a whole: Some people do stuff and everyone else rides their meat. I mean, SF almost banned Seth just cus J Wong said so
Dont ask questions to which you already know the answer.
You have to play MK and employ broken tactics in tourney.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,860
You could, you know, use MK. If people won't ban him, just take their money. It's free money if you're any good at this game.
I'm not complaining. :D
AvaricePanda
Smash Lord
This was obvious from page one.
It was known that this wouldn't have much of an impact on the total vote unless one side held a large read. It was known that it wouldn't have a large lead because of the three other polls that didn't have a large lead. It could have been implied that anti-ban would have a lead in the S.B.R. because the last vote they did, they said there were 3/4ths anti-ban, and 1/4ths pro-ban.
You can't honestly have just now realized that this poll wouldn't have a large impact on the overall vote, and deny to target any arguments because of this.
GigaBowserXyZ
Smash Journeyman
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2009
- Messages
- 454
yea and tell the guys who picked anti ban "u can't john about mk cause u picked anti ban."
'V'
Smash Lord
Well then...
/thread
Good day, gentlemen.
/thread
Good day, gentlemen.
- Status