Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

[SoupaSonic]

well you make a good point... but I'm stickin to my guns, the way I see it is if you pick up someone who has the closest thing to a 50/50 match up then you can stand a chance if you play smart. I don't know why I'm not pro ban, he'll probably be banned anyways

 

[AvaricePanda]

Actually, several people have addressed your question, including myself, but they've been buried under everything else.

I think the problem here is that you exaggerate how much better things have become. Things have become better, slightly but, just like more than a year ago, Metaknight still has a huge lead over Snake who inturn has a huge lead over the rest of the cast. As the Amazing Ampharos showed earlier, Metaknight has almost triple the amount of placings when it comes to major tournament placements this year then the second closest character, Snake. The both share 4 wins apiece but, for everything else, Metaknight still leaves everyone in the dust.How is that not proof that this game is still a game that is essentially focused on beating one character?

I want to know how this game is focused on beating MK. Seriously. Is it something that matters to a lot of characters? Yes. But match-ups against high-tier and especially the best character in any game are important, and they're things you want to explore very deeply. In any game. You'll find this to be true of any game.

What tournament placings are you looking at, specifically? Ankoku's character rankings list is nice and all, but it isn't very specific. Various factors like other players and characters at attendance, regions, weight, "largeness", players themselves, etc., factor in as well.

You speak of match ups becoming closer but, seriously, this has been happening since the game came out. One character would find something that works against Metaknight and then Metaknight players quickly find something that counters. Since the game has been released, we have had a decent people say at one point in time that Donkey Kong, Wolf, Bowser, Shiek, Yoshi, Diddy Kong, Zero Suit Samus, Falco, Ice Climbers, Wario, and Snake have all been Metaknight counters. Where are all these characters now? Where are all these "saviors" to the metagame? Most of these characters were quickly countered simply by counterpicking stages ontop of strategies being found to counter the anti-Metaknight strategies. Even then, the only character that hasn't been fully worked around at some point is Snake. Diddy Kong has been claimed to be a potential counter since last summer and the Ice Climbers can be just as easily stage counterpicked or ledgecamped (hey, if Pikachu can easily ledgecamp the ICs then Metaknight certainly can do the same). As expected, since Metaknight has not true counters this has been a really slow process especially since everyone else does have counters.

Counters=/=bad match-ups.

A disadvantageous match-up is different than a counter. Would you call 55:45 a counter? Would you CP Wario that you don't use much to beat a really good Diddy Kong, and actually expect to win?

Wario doesn't really have counters. His bad match-ups are D3 I think, MK slightly, and Marth by some margin. But you can't expect to counter a Wario with Marth; you'd have to actually invest a lot of time into the character to beat a good Wario.

Snake doesn't really have counters, nor does Wario. Just bad match-ups.

Whether or not one of his match-ups was considered even a long time ago doesn't matter to what it is now. As far as my knowledge goes, Diddy vs. MK was thought to be 6:4 MK back in August, now it's thought to be at worst 55:45 MK, and Diddy has known techs that aren't used much that could help him quite a bit in the match-up.

Also, you have to consider the mid-level of competitive play too where Metaknight is more dominant and more people have quit Brawl due to him. If anything, there has been evidence that this is increasing despite the lead Metaknight having over Snake slightly decreasing. As several other people said, the mid-level of play makes the high-level of play even possible so if a decent number of people in the mid-level of play leave, it definately hurts the high-level of play.

I'm going to honestly ask, why is MK more dominant in the mid-level of play? Is this something you just threw together, or do you have concrete proof to back up the claim that, "You have to be REALLY good to beat any MK?"

As Tyr said, in the Midwest region, we've seen Shugo beat Overswarm twice in money-matches. Nope won a 30ish man tournament with two great Ohio MKs. Krystedez, a Wario main from Indianapolis, just recently went to a Chicago championship tournament and beat 3 good MKs, Sago, Fatboy, and Bowyer, losing to Judge and Anther.

Who's a notable player that quit Brawl due to Meta Knight? Or any player anyone's ever heard of? How does Meta Knight dominate at mid-levels of play? It sounds like this was just some made up "fact" thrown into the argument that nobody bothered to correct.

As myself and others have said, under competitive ideals, Metaknight should not be banned simply because he doesn't have counterpicks. The difference though is that Brawl is a more shallow game than most popular fighting games and the metagame as a whole has mostly slowed to a crawl. Basically, we have a slow developing game that is still riddled with a lot of "gay" elements. We have jab locks but those can be prevented by counterpicking. We have chain grabs, grab releases, and infinites but those can be prevented by counterpicking. We have various forms of camping but, again, those can be counterpicked around. In the end, we are left with one thing that makes the game look bad and greatly lowers its appeal but can't be counterpicked, Metaknight. I personally believe that keeping Metaknight will overall greatly shorten the life span of this game because of the reasons I've already said in this post and how his presence prevents more diversity by keeping 5 characters from becoming viable and 4 from being more viable. Again, if Brawl wasn't so littered with problems already and was more like Melee in terms of "competitiveness", this wouldn't even be an issue but, sadly, that's not the case.

[/quote]

Which five characters does he make unviable, which four does he make less viable?

I can think of characters that he makes LESS viable, and I can think of otherwise really viable characters that he makes less viable, but they're still viable enough.

Also, this counterpicking argument is bleh, because it's assuming that

1) Counterpicking characters is a strategy often used in high, and even medium levels of play.

2) Even match-ups or even better match-ups don't qualify as being counterpicks, even though you're still improving a match-up more in your favor (example, assume I have a really really good Snake and a really really good Diddy, neither of which I actually have. I've heard judge and ksizle both say that they have Diddy weaknesses, and I'm more likely to play Diddy against them. Dojo secondaries Diddy and probably knows a lot more about him than most other MK mains, so I'm more likely to use Snake).

 

[iRJi]

well you make a good point... but I'm stickin to my guns, the way I see it is if you pick up someone who has the closest thing to a 50/50 match up then you can stand a chance if you play smart. I don't know why I'm not pro ban, he'll probably be banned anyways

Ty. Just to bring this back up for everyone else, I will repost one of my posts from earlier when i was talking to Melo:

There's way more CP'ing in Melee than you think, especially in the fights with top tiers. If a Marth ran into a really good Sheik, you'd best believe he'd CP Fox on Cornerria.

Marth and Fox both arguably have no bad matchups in Melee. Just even ones. Fox's even matchups being Marth and Falco. Marth's being Fox and Sheik.

Granted Brawl is a different game than Melee, they both still follow the same basic principles. The "no bad matchups" argument can easily be said for other games not related to smash at all as well. Just CP to an even matchup if that's the case and pick a stage that isn't as much in Meta Knight's favor. There's your CP. It's not broken.

I did have a talk with one of my friends about this earlier infact. MK does have bad stages, but it is character dependent. Diddy on FD would be a fast and easy example. The thing about C/P is that there is infact a chance to ban a stage, and to also strike one. MK does have a good advantage on most neutrals, and the one's he can lose to because of it being character dependent can simply be striked.

Example: Diddy vs MK
Diddy would want Fd as his first pick, due to the fact he has a large and better chance of beating him. Arguably one of his best stages to play an MK on.

MK strike's FD. Diddy loses all of advantages on neutrals. Battle field is not that good for Diddy. Lylat and Yoshi's fall into the same boat. Next best pick would be Smashville, but that is actually one of MK's best stages.

A good decent post on proof would be here:

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7669433&postcount=626

Now lets talk about C/Ping Mk on a stage. Can you name 2 stages that MK can not fight on against a character? Because of that he can simply ban and it locks off the limits of what can happen.

In most cases, MK will have a C/P stage that is Character dependent, but also in these cases he only has one stage that can screw him over. That is where the ban comes in, and you can simply ban the stage from being used.

Of course, other characters float in the same boat when it comes to this situation, but other characters can be C/P'd by character, still giving them a slight advantage if they wanted it. MK however, still goes even to positive on every character in game. That Plus the fact that he can eliminate most of his bad stages in most cases, makes it a double threat. Most characters, infact, all other characters, don't have the luxury of both blessings.

 

[adumbrodeus]

And most people are stupid, what can I say?

The point of that was that there are other reasons then just the payout, the payout is a GOOD thing, but it's not the only worthwhile thing.

Which can be achieved at no cost.

With a ridiculous amount of planning and/or traveling.

Which can be experienced just by paying travel costs.

And a ridiculous amount of planning, and almost always a lower variety of players.

With little to no time to play any of them aside from what you're allotted in tournament sets. Like I said, people are paying to play a game they already own with people they live close enough to to just call and ask to play. It's like mother ****ers never heard of a smashfest.

I think you're thinking to local, when's the last time Inui came out to a smashfest on LI for example.

Your mindset definitely works for really local tournaments, granted, but once the tourney hits a certain size, the payout isn't the only thing important.

 

[Clai]

I said this before: we should just ban every character that has a matchup with MK worse than 45:55. That would also solve the problem.

I know. Terrible characters overcentralize the metagame. All of our efforts are going toward beating these characters because they're too terrible and are tearing the community apart.

Seriously, do you want Captain Falcon banned? I know that there would be a lot more people that would quit if Falcon were banned than if Metaknight was banned. I would be one of them, because this community would be way too 'srzus bznus" to allow fun characters in this game because they get ***** by Metaknight too hard.

Is that where you're going with this?

 

[adumbrodeus]

I know. Terrible characters overcentralize the metagame. All of our efforts are going toward beating these characters because they're too terrible and are tearing the community apart.

Seriously, do you want Captain Falcon banned? I know that there would be a lot more people that would quit if Falcon were banned than if Metaknight was banned. I would be one of them, because this community would be way too 'srzus bznus" to allow fun characters in this game because they get ***** by Metaknight too hard.

Is that where you're going with this?

Clai, I think the idea is to showcase the absurdity of the ban, not seriously suggest we ban mk.

 

[Praxis]

Everyone who is still using Genesis results as an argument for lack of MK domination just because Ally won really needs to read the second post of this thread.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7968431&postcount=2

Especially people being dumb like Yuna.

 

[Clai]

Clai, I think the idea is to showcase the absurdity of the ban, not seriously suggest we ban mk.

Supermodel from Paris voted yes on the MK ban. I just wanted to make the point that banning Captain Falcon is ludicrous, if not outright insane.

 

[CY]

banning MK is ****ing ********. praxis, didn't you beat DSF in a set? so basically, you beat one of the top MKs, i don't see what the big deal. MK is clearly beatable, people just want an easier time at tournaments. xyro already made the decision for TX, which is going to backfire in the end. he pretty much banned MK just because he wanted to, not the community. it's because MK ***** samus, iirc.

but honestly, i don't see the need for the huge *** OP. it's BRAWL, who really cares that much? this game will be dead in the next year or so anyway.

 

[Llumys]

Out of curiosity, why do people still think that Meta Knight being unbeatable or not is an issue?

Read the whole first post before saying anything stupid.

 

[piZ]

Praxis is my hero.

 

[iRJi]

Everyone who is still using Genesis results as an argument for lack of MK domination just because Ally won really needs to read the second post of this thread.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7968431&postcount=2

Especially people being dumb like Yuna.

You sir, are pro =]

 

[Praxis]

banning MK is ****ing ********. praxis, didn't you beat DSF in a set? so basically, you beat one of the top MKs, i don't see what the big deal. MK is clearly beatable, people just want an easier time at tournaments. xyro already made the decision for TX, which is going to backfire in the end. he pretty much banned MK just because he wanted to, not the community. it's because MK ***** samus, iirc.

but honestly, i don't see the need for the huge *** OP. it's BRAWL, who really cares that much? this game will be dead in the next year or so anyway.

DSF "did it wrong", so to speak. I could have told him exactly what to do in each situation and I would have lost horribly. I know how to fight MK; I know the matchup; I know exactly what to do. I can beat MK's based on the fact that THEY haven't spent the same amount of the learning how to fight Peach as I have learning to fight MK.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Supermodel from Paris voted yes on the MK ban. I just wanted to make the point that banning Captain Falcon is ludicrous, if not outright insane.

One other possibility then, this community is never happy about anything... ever. Which is pretty true.

Having some dealing with SfP, definately not dumb enough to suggest that seriously.

 

[AvaricePanda]

Everyone who is still using Genesis results as an argument for lack of MK domination just because Ally won really needs to read the second post of this thread.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7968431&postcount=2

Especially people being dumb like Yuna.

Avarice wrote at 12:45 AM on Jul 16, 2009 :
c@tnip lost to FOW and Atomsk
Dojo lost to DEHF and Tyrant
Tyrant lost to Ally and M2K
Havok lost to ADHD and SK92

It's easy to manipulate information into what you want to hear. As far as MKs go in the top spots, pro-ban will say "3 out of 4," and anti-ban will say, "3 out of 8."

What you aren't taking into account is player skill. You're assuming that all of these players are on equal footing, and this one set in this tournament that they play will definitively prove the two character's match-ups. They aren't, and it doesn't. Sure, they're all good players, but they aren't all Ally good, or M2K good, or Tyrant good, or whatever.

You're also disregarding Ally, lol.

And as aforementioned, one set doesn't determine a match-up. Granted, it helps back up a claim that a match-up is even or in an advantage or disadvantage when top level players play these sets against these characters, but it proves nothing. Ally's beaten Atomsk, and it doesn't mean that Snake beats D3. ADHD's come very close to beating Tyrant and M2K, amd has beaten Dojo, but it doesn't mean that the match-up can't really be anything close.

Quote from myself from the blog Fiction made on AiB about that. Those results whatever thing he made was pretty skewed.

You're also forgetting one thing: top players beat other top players. Surprise! Take for example, Anther and Lain. Some months ago, Anther was really dominating the Midwest, but since around APEX, Lain stepped it up and started beating Anther more frequently than Anther was beating Lain.

As aforementioned yet again, Ally keeps being disregarded. Why? Because he's, "Too good," or "Just that far ahead everyone else." Doesn't it prove that one player who doesn't use MK and one character who isn't MK can beat the top MKs in the country.

The main thing that's wrong with Fiction's argument in that post is that those single sets can somehow single-handedly prove a match-up. They don't. Again, while sets give evidence to support a claim that a match-up goes one way, by themselves, they prove nothing. Your argument in that post (at least the first part, before it goes to Chibo's criteria) is based off of Fiction's match-up statements, skewed results, forgetting that these are all players using characters, not just characters, and ignoring Ally.

 

[SoupaSonic]

Whoa cool, I never saw a pro on SWF before! Ok back to the topic... just like on the first post, the game is evolving... maybe next year pit will be the next one to dominate tournaments, or maybe Sonic (a little far stretched I know). But my point is that we simply need to find ways to beat him instead of banning him from competitive play. Remember that he is a light weight so we just need an easy way to rack up damage and put up the finishing blow. I know I sound stupid because it sounds too simple, but it's true. And for the people blaming the community, please don't (It's Sakurai's fault... jk)

 

[adumbrodeus]

Out of curiosity, why do people still think that Meta Knight being unbeatable or not is an issue?

Read the whole first post before saying anything stupid.

Because people love to strawman, and exegerate and ****.


Me and shadowlink talked about this a little while back, we're both ardent anti-banners because we think that MK doesn't fit the criteria, but we both recognize that misrepresenting the issue is a bad idea, and anti-ban does tend to go overboard.

MK is not even with as many people as is suggested, and some of those match-ups shouldn't be 60-40, but he's not banworthy.

Quote from myself from the blog Fiction made on AiB about that. Those results whatever thing he made was pretty skewed.

You're also forgetting one thing: top players beat other top players. Surprise! Take for example, Anther and Lain. Some months ago, Anther was really dominating the Midwest, but since around APEX, Lain stepped it up and started beating Anther more frequently than Anther was beating Lain.

As aforementioned yet again, Ally keeps being disregarded. Why? Because he's, "Too good," or "Just that far ahead everyone else." Doesn't it prove that one player who doesn't use MK and one character who isn't MK can beat the top MKs in the country.

The main thing that's wrong with Fiction's argument in that post is that those single sets can somehow single-handedly prove a match-up. They don't. Again, while sets give evidence to support a claim that a match-up goes one way, by themselves, they prove nothing. Your argument in that post (at least the first part, before it goes to Chibo's criteria) is based off of Fiction's match-up statements, skewed results, forgetting that these are all players using characters, not just characters, and ignoring Ally.

Both ally and m2k are irrelevant because they're so could they could probably be dominating with any reasonable character.


Unless people are suggesting MK is unbeatable... is anyone?

 

[Omni]

DSF "did it wrong", so to speak. I could have told him exactly what to do in each situation and I would have lost horribly. I know how to fight MK; I know the matchup; I know exactly what to do. I can beat MK's based on the fact that THEY haven't spent the same amount of the learning how to fight Peach as I have learning to fight MK.

No johns. This is probably another weakness for Metaknight: The fact that he has to master every potentially threatening match-up in order to keep up is not easy.

"DSF did it wrong"? Lmfao. Give me a break, Praxis. That's not an excuse.

Perhaps "you did it right". See how easy that can be twisted?

It's the same thing with what you said about Ally and M2K. According to you, Ally didn't beat M2K; M2K lost to Ally. M2K "messed up".

No johns, ****it.

 

[adumbrodeus]

No johns. This is probably another weakness for Metaknight: The fact that he has to master every potentially threatening match-up in order to keep up is not easy.

"DSF did it wrong"? Lmfao. Give me a break, Praxis. That's not an excuse.

Perhaps "you did it right". See how easy that can be twisted?

It's the same thing with what you said about Ally and M2K. According to you, Ally didn't beat M2K; M2K lost to Ally. M2K "messed up".

No johns, ****it.

The thing is, that's what happens in bad match-ups, if both people "do it right" the person with the bad match-up loses.

You only win when you're doing it right and the other person is doing it wrong.

Or, you read them like a book, which usually means you're a much much better player.


No johns only talks about your skill, but it's perfectly fair and a good thing to talk about things that skewed the situation when talking about a more overarching issue.

 

[Praxis]

Okay, my memory was faulty - I don't have a direct name, I have someone who says video evidence exists. Presumably he can provide it. I will quote him for reference:

So assuming Praxis is truthful (Do you have reason to doubt him?) MK in the hands of a skilled player can simply bypass bans on his IDC by only using it occasionally, at moments of extreme need, and be effectively unpunishable.

When a rule is unenforcable, a stricter option needs to go in. I've been told that we don't ban a character's move entirely, but it sounds like with MK you're going to have to ban his dimensional cape or ban him if you want this to be solved.

Mew2King used IDC to get back onto the stage while playing against Dojo at WHOBO, IIRC. Several people noticed the usage.

 

[1048576]

MK has to learn the Peach matchup just as much as Ganondorf does. The fact that good MKs haven't learned the matchup might be because MK players don't have to devote as much time to being good as players who need to learn every frame and pixel just to stand a chance against the MK behemoth. M2K's the exception.

 

[AvaricePanda]

MK has to learn the Peach matchup just as much as Ganondorf does. The fact that good MKs haven't learned the matchup might be because MK players don't have to devote as much time to being good as players who need to learn every frame and pixel just to stand a chance against the MK behemoth. M2K's the exception.

Umm...

OR it's because you're going to encounter many more MK players at a tournament than you will Peach. Logically, you're going to know the match-ups of high and top tier pretty well, and then the match-ups of the mains of good players in your region. If you rarely have to ever fight Peaches, why would you take the time to learn the match-up, when you could be using that time to learn or perfect a different match-up?

Most people know top and high-tier match-ups really well, while knowing next to nothing about low-tier match-ups. It's more logical to focus on the MK and Snake match-ups than the Yoshi and Samus match-ups.

 

[Praxis]

No johns. This is probably another weakness for Metaknight: The fact that he has to master every potentially threatening match-up in order to keep up is not easy.

"DSF did it wrong"? Lmfao. Give me a break, Praxis. That's not an excuse.

Perhaps "you did it right". See how easy that can be twisted?

Wait, what?

Are you seriously denying that Peach has a disadvantage to Metaknight because I beat DSF in a MM? Or saying that "lacking matchup knowledge" is a weakness of MK as a character?

>_>

If a Peach beats a MK in tournament, the MK was the inferior player, or didn't know the matchup. I think this a fair statement, considering the matchup is normally considered 70:30 or 65:35 Metaknight's favor.


Yes, I "did it right" and DSF did not in that one set. Matchup knowledge isn't a weakness of the character, but a weakness of the player.

A MK like TKD would **** me.


As to Ally; I've told everyone who asked me about the match directly what I felt; i.e., I was in the room, Mew2King fell asleep, woke up, didn't want to play, drank a Monster, and performed terribly, freaking out and shaking during the match.

However, I've NEVER used my opinion of that set in the actual argument! Look at my first page post about Genesis results. I didn't even talk about that set, because I know that people will just say I'm johning.

You're just bringing it up at random because of our AIM discussion! I didn't even argue it!!!

 

[pastaboy]

ally shuld use falcon only next tourny

 

[Xzax Kasrani]

Another thing is a lot of non MK players always have a mindset of, Oh i didn't get outplayed its the character. Thats not it at all. MK players aren't ******** and they are smart. You can't rely on gimmicks from a character that doesn't **** every character to win. Everyone has to realize MK players work aswell and its not all easy to use him since every good player knows how to fight him.Theres no novelty factor with MK, its based on skill and knowledge.

 

[pwiito]

each time i check the poll, the difference gets longer!

 

[SoupaSonic]

xzax1337 is right, kinda... I don't think all MK players are smart. More lazy than smart to me since he is #1 on the Tier list. But I still want to see him around in tourneys.

 

[Vex Kasrani]

Ban Ice Climbers please.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Another thing is a lot of non MK players always have a mindset of, Oh i didn't get outplayed its the character. Thats not it at all. MK players aren't ******** and they are smart. You can't rely on gimmicks from a character that doesn't **** every character to win. Everyone has to realize MK players work aswell and its not all easy to use him since every good player knows how to fight him.Theres no novelty factor with MK, its based on skill and knowledge.

It doesn't have to be gimicky for the character to beat you.

Most of the time it's the skill being multiplied by the characters core attributes.


Again, that's what match-ups ARE, if you play at the same level of skill (defined as being just as proficient as using the aspects of your character and and recognizing and exploiting patterns in your opponent), if you've got a bad match-up against the opponent YOU WILL LOSE.


If you're slightly better then your opponent at doing this, but the match-up more then makes up for it, you lose to the character.

 

[momochuu]

Lol, you're silly.

 

[Clai]

DSF "did it wrong", so to speak. I could have told him exactly what to do in each situation and I would have lost horribly. I know how to fight MK; I know the matchup; I know exactly what to do. I can beat MK's based on the fact that THEY haven't spent the same amount of the learning how to fight Peach as I have learning to fight MK.

Congratulations, you have just personally admitted that Metaknight isn't broken, and in order for them to win, they have to spend the same amount of time learning their matchups as other players do to beat Metaknight. You have just said something that applies to EVERY TOP-TIER CHARACTER IN EVERY FIGHTING GAME EVER!

Now, Genesis notwithstanding, I'm going to answer the points you brought up by reintroducing the second post:

Argument 1: MetaKnight is not broken

You (referring to Anti-Ban side collectively) mention that MetaKnight does not have the ability to bypass hit stun, DI, KOs, free movement, or other concepts familiar to smash game play while being bound by the rules - however MetaKnight does indeed have options to do so. A popular tactic for MetaKnight is the Infinite Dimensional Cape. This tactic, which makes MetaKnight both invincible and invisible (obviously making it so he is not effected by the normal aspects of the game) was promptly banned, but it has proven to not be enough. There has been video evidence of players using even just a little bit of IDC to escape certain situations, enough to where it would be tough to call out at the time of the match, but enough to make a judgement based on a video review. Despite the tactic being banned, players (including Mew2King) have managed to slip by with using it without any repercussion. Even if it is brought up that IDC is banned, there is the recently discovered EDC, which has different properties of the IDC, but is not bannable under the same criteria. It does however make MetaKnight both invisible and invulnerable for times he shouldn't be.

The reason we are attempting to ban Metaknight has nothing to do with the IDC and the EDC. We have already stated that the IDC is clearly broken and needed to be banned. If we discovered a technique where Ganondorf can make himself invincible and invulnerable for unnecessary amounts of time, we would have banned that too. It's just a coicidence that Metaknight happens to have this move. As for the EDC, I would like to see this video evidence where the Dimensional Cape proved to be a breaking point in a match. Heck, I want to see that Dojo-DEHF match you just keep harkening on about.

Argument 2: Metaknight does not dominate the metagame

You mention that Ally has defeated Mew2King to get first twice this season compared to Mew2King doing the same to him only once. While what you said is technically true, you are hiding a good amount of information that I hope people won't neglect to realize. The term season alone is a complete opinion in this situation. I seriously am not sure what you mean. In state power rankings in the regional zones, a season is determined by a ranking period generally, which does not apply here. In the case of the current weather-related season we are in - Summer - this is also not the case as the first day of Summer was June 21st, 2009.

(all x-x accounts are defined as Ally-M2k)
If you define season as Summer
Ally lost to Mew2King in Winners Finals at Genesis: 0-1 set count
Ally beat Mew2King in two sets in Grand Finals at Genesis: 2-1 set count; 1-0 tournament win
Mew2King beat Ally in Grand Finals at Evo 2k9: 2-2 set count; 1-1 tournament win

Obviously Summer isn't the season that was used, since neither set count, nor tournament wins match up to your 2-1 claim.

If you define season as starting before Apex
Ally beat Mew2King in Grand Finals at Apex: 1-0 set count; 1-0 tournament win
Ally lost to Mew2King in Winners Finals at Genesis: 1-1 set count
Ally beat Mew2King in two sets in Grand Finals at Genesis: 3-1 set count; 2-0 tournament win
Mew2King beat Ally in Grand Finals at Evo 2k9: 3-2 set count; 2-1 tournament win

This is what seems to be what you used in your analysis, with Ally winning two tournaments to M2k's one (when both were present) starting at Apex. It is quite ridiculous to define this time as "this season." There is no defined season starter in this situation, and it was simply used to cover up information. This is also without mentioning that the percent ratio Mew2King has on Ally is better in his set count than it is with his tournament count.

Players generally include CoT4 results in the whole Mew2King versus Ally debate, which when adding onto the last count with Apex in the mix:
Mew2king beat Ally in two sets in Winners and Grand Finals at CoT4: 3-4 set count; 2-2 tournament win

This places Mew2King above Ally in this respect. If you wish to go even further to Cataclysm 4, Mew2King and Ally's first meeting in a tournament, Mew2King beat Ally in winners finals and won the tournament with Ally taking home third place.

A master player was able to beat another master player who beat him before. OMG REALLY? This has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CHARACTER ITSELF, as Mew2King and Ally were able to play evenly matched based on their player skill, not the use of a character. Ally has already proven to consistently beat other top Metaknights such as Tyrant.

Argument #3: The game is still growing and evolving

Many compare this to the beginning of Melee, where players complained about Sheik and that this is a new game, we don't know as much. Times just aren't the same anymore. Super Smash Bros. Brawl has been a heavy target by homebrew developers, hacking the game to it's fullest. There are now versions such as Brawl-E, EXBrawl, and S-Brawl which have modified the game, but most importantly - Brawl+. Whether you favor it or not, you still have to appreciate what this project has given the community. The makers of Brawl+ have statistical information (with actual numbers and hard data to back it) of knockback, knockback gain, damage, and hitboxes of every single attack in the game, along with all data about characters such as frame data, weight, gravity, and much more. I'm willing to wager that we know more about this game at this point in time (approx 16 months after release) than any other fighting game ever created after 16 months of being released.

Even with players jumping on the bandwagon to be the best character, it has also had everyone who is not an MK main specifically look for tactics in their character to counter MetaKnight. Many players complain that even if they are MetaKnight, it's annoying as MetaKnight is one of the most known matchups for every other character in the game - however even with the combined knowledge of everyone, it is still debatable that MetaKnight does not have a single matchup he loses.

All said and done, it may be proven with hard data that Metaknight is, frame-by-frame, the best character in the game. That's whoop-de-do and all, but there are some things you simply can't measure with a machine. The ability to react and adapt to situations, the ability to determine which option to use within a certain time limit, these are things that define the way that people play. If the debate closes that Metaknight doesn't lose a match-up, that's swell; however, we have already proven that players who main other characters are capable of beating players within their skill level that use Metaknight, which should render a ban null.

Argument #4: Implying that Metaknight breaks the counterpick system also implies that Brawl is a game based on counterpicking

The counterpicking system in Smash is very important and a staple to the game's success. It is essentially a tournament rule, no different than what stages are banned, if "planking" is banned, if stalling is banned, if IDC is banned, or if we have 3 stocks instead of 10. If you wish to discredit the counterpicking system, then you might as well also discredit banning IDC (a player-created rule), which if legal, would make MetaKnight a guaranteed make MetaKnight bannable.

Banning stalling, banning planking and setting the amount of stocks to 3 were decided upon because that's what benefited the community the most. You don't HAVE to counterpick, and many top players choose not to counterpick when they go up against Metaknight. I think you're responding to this part of the argument wrong. Maybe you can respond to: "Implying that Metaknight breaks the counterpick system also implies that Brawl is a game that DEMANDS counterpicking."

You really can't compare Brawl and Smash 64 in the way that you did. A best character is a best character - agreed. Even when MetaKnight is banned, there will be a new best character. The difference between the games is that Brawl is an overly-defensive game in which characters trade hits, the player in control isn't always the defensive one. In Smash 64 however, just about ever character has some form of a 0-death combo, and with the insane amount of hitstun, shieldstun, and the Z-canceling of any aerial to eliminate all aerial lag, Smash 64 rewards on being offensive. Getting a single hit in on Pikachu isn't hard. It isn't hard getting a hit on MetaKnight either. The difference being that a single hit on Pikachu in Smash 64 can literally mean death for that character, which certainly is not the case in Brawl. A MetaKnight can make any number of mistakes in Brawl and still walk away with a safe win. Isai's quote ("Don't get hit") doesn't hold any weight in Brawl, for in Brawl "It's ok if you get hit."

The 0-death combo system is an accepted philosophy that applies to all characters in Smash64 and the community for that game took that to account when dealing with ALL of its characters. Pikachu is still the best character in the game regardless. Brawl is a defensive game, for sure, so we have to look at other options. Metaknight certainly takes a long time to kill some characters, and he certainly doesn't like taking hits that send him to the top.

Argument #5: Metaknight’s extraneous circumstances are already resolved

Everything here is essentially void. You bring up the use of player-created rules to keep MetaKnight in-line which you discredit in your 4th argument, which whether or not I agree with, is contradictory to your own essay. This is also without mentioning that the anti-planking rule is really based on judgement, which has been proven to not work in true competitive play since it is fully based on opinion. Stalling has been defined as making the game unplayable or doing an infinite past 300%, which is ok. The ledge grab rule is also ok, but was truly only implemented at first because of MetaKnight. It started at 70, then being lowered to 50 for some tournaments, and there has even been some discussion of lowering it to around 25. Clearly the rule does not work it having to constantly be modified and the new onset of "air-planking." As for IDC, the new issue of EDC has arisen, which can not be banned the same way, and it is still a problem. In the case of Dojo vs DEHF, this certainly was a problem of MetaKnight. This is not the first time a MetaKnight has air-planked an opponent to win. Dojo has done it, Plank has done it, I've even watched other anti-ban SBR members do it in tournament. Whether or not you see it as a problem, it was attempted to be called out on Dojo for a reason. UTDZac did the same thing that very tournament, and did anyone care? No, he was Mr. Game and Watch.

So air-planking to win with Metaknight creates problems and cause for disqualification, but air-planking to win as Wario or Mr. Game and Watch don't? I feel you just totally destroyed your own argument here, as although planking originally started with Plank's Metaknight, it's certainly something that can't be abused by other characters.

 

[½NIÇK½FBM]

Ban Ice Climbers please.

Support. :bigthumbu

 

[Raikou_Cypher]

Another thing is a lot of non MK players always have a mindset of, Oh i didn't get outplayed its the character. Thats not it at all. MK players aren't ******** and they are smart. You can't rely on gimmicks from a character that doesn't **** every character to win. Everyone has to realize MK players work aswell and its not all easy to use him since every good player knows how to fight him.Theres no novelty factor with MK, its based on skill and knowledge.

FALSE

Plenty of mk players are not smart, and just spam moves like mach whorenado and dsmash.

 

[Red Arremer]

each time i check the poll, the difference gets longer!

Odd, each time I check, the difference is smaller.

 

[Vex Kasrani]

FALSE

Plenty of mk players are not smart, and just spam moves like mach whorenado and dsmash.

Those are the MK's that get destroyed by players with a brain.

 

[adumbrodeus]

FALSE

Plenty of mk players are not smart, and just spam moves like mach whorenado and dsmash.

If you lose to that (except for against characters that literally can't get through nado like Luigi) then you're just bad.

Congratulations, you have just personally admitted that Metaknight isn't broken, and in order for them to win, they have to spend the same amount of time learning their matchups as other players do to beat Metaknight. You have just said something that applies to EVERY TOP-TIER CHARACTER IN EVERY FIGHTING GAME EVER!

I'm sorry Clai, that's not correct, time it takes to learn match-ups isn't really the issue, it more how overpowering MK is when played right.

And we're asserting that he isn't powerful enough to justify a ban.


Saying he still takes time to learn doesn't change the core issue.

 

[Divinokage]

Voters: 2425

I would be delighted to see all those people into one big event OMFG loll.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

It goes back and forth. Overall the match-up between anti-ban and pro-ban is about 45:55. We'll need a new AT or something to have a truly winning match-up against anti-bans.

 

[Xzax Kasrani]

FALSE

Plenty of mk players are not smart, and just spam moves like mach whorenado and dsmash.

Then how are they winning? If someone can't beat that then they shouldn't have a say if the character in bannable or not since they obviously aren't good.

 

[fkacyan]

FALSE

Plenty of mk players are not smart, and just spam moves like mach whorenado and dsmash.

And they don't make it out of pools.