Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

[fkacyan]

they let people in the backroom for being inui's friend, didn't you hear?

I'd be the Back Room if that was the case.

 

[Dabuz]

n00b post....

Would the mid tiers (low tiers are out of the question anyway) benefit that much if MK was banned, or would the other high tiers still be too much for them? If not, a ban would only benefit other high tiers, who already can do alright (that is to say, they aren't doomed) against Meta Knight. But if the mid tiers would benefit alot, then we could be playing a game with more diversity.

a lot of mid tiers would suffer worse because of matchups like ddd or falco that hands down beat them more than mk

 

[fkacyan]

Someone please lock this thread already! There have been THREE previous threads with polls that have all been in favor of banning MK! Please lock thread!

None of them have had a difference so large as to be conclusive.

 

[iRJi]

I actually don't know why I didn't say Marth, haha. I always think Sheik and Fox first, for whatever reason.

Whatever, point is that there are characters in Melee that have match ups just as good, or better, than MKs.

True, but also take into the fact it is infact a different game with different mechanics. Melee was not as heavily based on C/Ping as brawl is, although quite a few C/P needed to be done. Also, Although that Sheik And Fox were all dominate characters in the game, they still had at least 1 C/P. MK in this case, only has even matchups that are known to this date. Also, normally I would like to trend into different games for information about why things should be banned, but it is sad to say that brawl is a completely different breed of a fighting game. Drawing conclusions from other games can make good points, but in some cases are not really valid because of the different mechanics that are being used, and how the system works. its not a broken system at all, but it is cripples severely because of this factor. of course, you also have agreed with me that it does hurt the system, so no need to bring that back up.

 

[Skrlx]

I know the mods are lurking this thread but despite all the cons and pros to this argument this all sounds like one big community john.

Look at ssb64 Kirby is really broken and the most easy to pick up. In ssb64 Kirby has this ridiculous utilt with broken range and priority although it's discouraged to use kirby nobody bans him. Like what most do is they don't john about it and ban him they try to move around the utilts etc.

This may appear as flaming or whatever but it's my opinion.

As for the banning of Meta Knight I say no.

(by the way i don't main meta knight so that people don't assume favoritism)

 

[uhmuzing]

a lot of mid tiers would suffer worse because of matchups like ddd or falco that hands down beat them more than mk

So you don't think the mid tiers would benefit. You don't think we'd see a surplus of good mid tiers if MK was banned? Or would Falco, D3, Snake, and others just take up the extra space?

 

[En.Ee.Oh]

Wow @ Bardul listed among Pro-Ban, and first LOL


he's so incredibly biased it's not even funny


Bardul has clearly done nothing to learn the MK matchup whatsoever, stupid SBR. How am I not even in it?

 

['V']

n00b post....

Would the mid tiers (low tiers are out of the question anyway) benefit that much if MK was banned, or would the other high tiers still be too much for them? If not, a ban would only benefit other high tiers, who already can do alright (that is to say, they aren't doomed) against Meta Knight. But if the mid tiers would benefit alot, then we could be playing a game with more diversity.

Yes. Anyone see Marth coming along here? He was already enough of a problem before.

 

[ruin`]

they let people in the backroom for being inui's friend, didn't you hear?

Hylian as well.

Btw, good stuff to Praxis about "this player beats mk and this player beats mk" and they ALL lost at genesis.

 

[stingers]

uh oh 5 infraction points

ban mk, he's broken. because uh, his recovery, and stuff

 

[goodoldganon]

I actually don't know why I didn't say Marth, haha. I always think Sheik and Fox first, for whatever reason.

Whatever, point is that there are characters in Melee that have match ups just as good, or better, than MKs.

You seem to forget that not only did all three (we'll even say 4 and include Falco for the whole top tier) had at least one to two counterpicks and at least 1 bad stage. You also seem to be forgetting that is 3 characters you mentioned that 'break' the system as compared to Brawls supposed one.

 

[Dabuz]

So you don't think the mid tiers would benefit. You don't think we'd see a surplus of good mid tiers if MK was banned? Or would Falco, D3, Snake, and others just take up the extra space?

not snakes, he would obviously decrease, but i could see A LOT more warios, marths, diddies, and maybe falcos along with the occasional high tier like olimar(who could be top without mk), but thats it, mid tiers wouldn't benefit, and there isn't a reason for them to be benefiting considering in no fighting game can mid tiers truly win at top levels

 

[Melomaniacal]

True, but also take into the fact it is infact a different game with different mechanics. Melee was not as heavily based on C/Ping as brawl is, although quite a few C/P needed to be done. Also, Although that Sheik And Fox were all dominate characters in the game, they still had at least 1 C/P. MK in this case, only has even matchups that are known to this date. Also, normally I would like to trend into different games for information about why things should be banned, but it is sad to say that brawl is a completely different breed of a fighting game. Drawing conclusions from other games can make good points, but in some cases are not really valid because of the different mechanics that are being used, and how the system works. its not a broken system at all, but it is cripples severely because of this factor. of course, you also have agreed with me that it does hurt the system, so no need to bring that back up.

Okay, I can agree that Melee is less... counter-pickish.

I still feel that my other points still stand. I don't believe that a character needs at least one legitimate, solid counter. I feel that a few even/slight disadvantageous match ups is even better, in fact. That allows for more even match ups, where the better player will win. Metaknight has these. He has enough of these for me to shrug off the counter-picking point.
I do, however, think it's one of the pro-ban's better arguments.

You seem to forget that not only did all three (we'll even say 4 and include Falco for the whole top tier) had at least one to two counterpicks and at least 1 bad stage. You also seem to be forgetting that is 3 characters you mentioned that 'break' the system as compared to Brawls supposed one.

Sheik has, like, one 45:55 match up. But I'm going to stop comparing it to Melee, I don't really think it works, haha.

And I don't think any of those characters "break" the counter-pick system, that's my point.

 

[goodoldganon]

Okay, I can agree that Melee is less... counter-pickish.

I still feel that my other points still stand. I don't believe that a character needs at least one legitimate, solid counter. I feel that a few even/slight disadvantageous match ups is even better, in fact. That allows for more even match ups, where the better player will win. Metaknight has these. He has enough of these for me to shrug off the counter-picking point.
I do, however, think it's one of the pro-ban's better arguments.

Who is MK's 'slight disadvantaged' matchup? The only two that come close are Snake and Wario. And it's debatable if MK is disadvantaged at all in those matchups. As you can see I play Brawl+ so maybe something new snuck under my radar.

 

[uhmuzing]

not snakes, he would obviously decrease, but i could see A LOT more warios, marths, diddies, and maybe falcos along with the occasional high tier like olimar(who could be top without mk), but thats it, mid tiers wouldn't benefit, and there isn't a reason for them to be benefiting considering in no fighting game can mid tiers truly win at top levels

So, MK unbalances the game by making it harder for other HIGH tiers to win? My real question is if MK was bannned, what would be the big changes in the community? How would the mid and top levels of play change?

 

[DanGR]

Wow @ Bardul listed among Pro-Ban, and first LOL


he's so incredibly biased it's not even funny


Bardul has clearly done nothing to learn the MK matchup whatsoever, stupid SBR. How am I not even in it?

That I do not know.

I typed them as I saw them, btw. That's why he's first.

 

[Dabuz]

counterpick mk to halberd if you play a character like snake or even ddd or falco who can kill somewhat reliably off the top of the screen, cause mk doesn't gain much while those characters do, and without mk, then both marth and wario have very little that can be cped against them, while not as bad as mk, they both kinda weaken the cp system without mk around

 

['V']

True, but also take into the fact it is infact a different game with different mechanics. Melee was not as heavily based on C/Ping as brawl is, although quite a few C/P needed to be done. Also, Although that Sheik And Fox were all dominate characters in the game, they still had at least 1 C/P. MK in this case, only has even matchups that are known to this date. Also, normally I would like to trend into different games for information about why things should be banned, but it is sad to say that brawl is a completely different breed of a fighting game. Drawing conclusions from other games can make good points, but in some cases are not really valid because of the different mechanics that are being used, and how the system works. its not a broken system at all, but it is cripples severely because of this factor. of course, you also have agreed with me that it does hurt the system, so no need to bring that back up.

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.

 

[iRJi]

Okay, I can agree that Melee is less... counter-pickish.

I still feel that my other points still stand. I don't believe that a character needs at least one legitimate, solid counter. I feel that a few even/slight disadvantageous match ups is even better, in fact. That allows for more even match ups, where the better player will win. Metaknight has these. He has enough of these for me to shrug off the counter-picking point.
I do, however, think it's one of the pro-ban's better arguments.

Ty for understanding, and your point is still valid. =]

 

[Melomaniacal]

Who is MK's 'slight disadvantaged' matchup? The only two that come close are Snake and Wario. And it's debatable if MK is disadvantaged at all in those matchups. As you can see I play Brawl+ so maybe something new snuck under my radar.

Snake, Wario, Diddy. I know Diddy is more stage dependent, but I still count it.
My main point is that he has match ups that are close enough to the point where the winner is more based on who's more skilled, not who has the better match up. To me, that doesn't hurt the counter-picking system enough for it to be evidence towards his ban.

Ty for understanding, and your point is still valid. =]

Thanks, and thank you for being civil. It's a nice refresher to have a debate feel less like a flame war, haha.

 

[Dabuz]

So, MK unbalances the game by making it harder for other HIGH tiers to win? My real question is if MK was bannned, what would be the big changes in the community? How would the mid and top levels of play change?

he doesn't even unbalance the game though, he makes it harder for them to win, but doesn't unbalance anything

 

[prOAPC]

no prohiban a metacaballero

 

[Xiammes]

I am neutral on the ban

1)pro ban side
it dosn't affect me the slightest bit

2) my anti ban side
I really hate to see the olimar and ddd characters count rise
their absoulutly evil

 

[Fatmanonice]

n00b post....

Would the mid tiers (low tiers are out of the question anyway) benefit that much if MK was banned, or would the other high tiers still be too much for them? If not, a ban would only benefit other high tiers, who already can do alright (that is to say, they aren't doomed) against Meta Knight. But if the mid tiers would benefit alot, then we could be playing a game with more diversity.

Not really. A vast majority of the cast would lose one crappy matchup but, as others have said, the mid/lower tiers would still have match ups that keep them from becoming viable. As you said, it would mostly affect high tier characters and several of them would become viable/more viable. For example, with Metaknight gone, Olimar, Toon Link, ROB, Pikachu, and some people would argue Pit would become viable and King Dedede, Mr. Game and Watch, Wario, and Marth would become more viable. Depending on what characters became popular after Metaknight was banned, it is argued that Falco, Snake, and Diddy Kong would lose some viability though.

 

[Zolios]

Why don't we enter a realistical field. What would happen to the metaknight mains if he was banned? Would they still attend tournaments? Are they in it just for the money. Here's my perspective on what would happen.

Although most of the anti-banners had a strong point against metaknight, they will secretly be enthusiastic about MK being banned, increasing their chance of winning by a small margin. Tournament attendance can only go down from this result, mainly because of people in protest over the ban or for some reason MK mainers decide to leave.

Eventually the community will start to bring him back in response to protest and bring metaknight back, and he would never become banned again.

Years afterwards, the "professional" community, if this lame-*** game does continue, will reflect on the stupidest decision they have ever made, while melee remains dominant.

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

 

[Atlus8]

None of them have had a difference so large as to be conclusive.

Right? This is all nonsense! Who cares about this thing? It's gonna be up to the TOs to decided if MK is banned or not! For those of you who complain about MK being to f***en broken, man the f**k up!

 

[uhmuzing]

he doesn't even unbalance the game though, he makes it harder for them to win, but doesn't unbalance anything

Well, that's what everybody is debating, isn't it?

Not really. A vast majority of the cast would lose one crappy matchup but, as others have said, the mid/lower tiers would still have match ups that keep them from becoming viable. As you said, it would mostly affect high tier characters and several of them would become viable/more viable. For example, with Metaknight gone, Olimar, Toon Link, ROB, Pikachu, and some people would argue Pit would become viable and King Dedede, Mr. Game and Watch, Wario, and Marth would become more viable. Depending on what characters became popular after Metaknight was banned, it is argued that Falco, Snake, and Diddy Kong would lose some viability though.

Well, there would be a little more diversity it seems, but at the cost of many, many people getting angry and possibly leaving Brawl. Not enough IMO for that price. I stick to my vote - anti-ban.

 

[bobson]

no prohiban a metacaballero

I enjoy this post.

 

[iRJi]

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.

 

[Inui]

i never knew there were so many dissillusioned ppl on smashboards -_-

honestly not to be mean...they should not let noobs vote...b/c that have absolutely no idea what there talking about...making a drastic move like banning a character should only be considered on whats happening at the top level of play....not random ppl playing

at top level of play...there are VERY few mks winning....m2k, anti, dojo, tyrant, judge

o no! 5 ppl are good with mk?!?!?!?!

ally me razer anti afro hrnut
boom....just from the top of my head 6 ppl snakes

i can go FOREVER on how many top players there are for other characters

and besides...snake is just as good if not BETTER than mk....mk is just an easier character to play

so you wanna ban mk? ok then what
then snake is gonna **** everything...iono if ppl noticed yet or not but mk was the only character that MIGHT go even with him....snake has the advantage over EVERYONE

he wins against DDD, wario, oli (seriously? his easiest matchup), dk, diddy, falco......EVERYONE

if played right its impossible to approach him....and has the ability to outcamp every character

so quit complaining about losing to mk.....ur not losing bc hes mk....ur losing bc u suck so much that instead of trying to learn the matchup you go on smashboards and whine like a little *****

the end.


munch munch???

laxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

qft

Except Anti's MK is actually kinda meh.

 

[KBM]

Someone has probably already commented on the decline of the % that the "Pro Ban" side has in the poll and I"d like to point out before this sort of *********** permeates

that it's simple statistics. if they start out with a simple majority of 2/3, they have 66%. if 2 more people come along and vote differently, you're looking at 3/5, which is only 60%. so the fact that the % lead pro-ban has is decreasing does NOT in any way mean that people are steadily voting "No" in greater numbers.

 

[BarDulL]

Wow @ Bardul listed among Pro-Ban, and first LOL

names are listed in polls alphabetically.

he's so incredibly biased it's not even funny

think what you want, but i've thoroughly examined both arguments while playing a neutral role on both sides of the debate. i've made my decision based on the facts, not for my own individual gain.

Bardul has clearly done nothing to learn the MK matchup whatsoever, stupid SBR. How am I not even in it?

what evidence seems to indicate that i've "clearly done nothing to learn the MK matchup whatsoever?"

i think you are the biased one here.

 

[fkacyan]

names are listed in polls alphabetically.

think what you want, but i've thoroughly examined both arguments while playing a neutral role on both sides of the debate. i've made my decision based on the facts, not for my own individual gain.

what evidence seems to indicate that i've "clearly done nothing to learn the MK matchup whatsoever?"

i think you are the biased one here.

I find this hilarious, because Neo mains Marth and thus, according to the entire community, stands a LOT to gain at MK being banned. If anything, he's one of the least biased people here.

 

[Suspect]

Neo cant be on he is too black

like mk black

 

[BarDulL]

I find this hilarious, because Neo mains Marth and thus, according to the entire community, stands a LOT to gain at MK being banned. If anything, he's one of the least biased people here.

i did not imply that he was biased because he was anti-ban.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

Quite the large post.

AA, if you wanted a response so soon, you shouldn’t have made your post so long. The size of your post exceeds that of the OP, which isn’t good. This is why people ignored your post as tl;dr.

The original argument was long itself. How am I supposed to refute a very long argument without a long post?

Don’t worry. I’ll respond despite the fact that no one responded to me several pages earlier when I destroyed the anti-ban’s arguments.

I don't remember a post from you really standing out, but feel free to link back to it.

History is NOT total bunk. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Remember this.

That's a nice catchphrase, but you didn't understand what I was saying. History is that Meta Knight has not been banned. If you think he should be banned, you are arguing for change. Arguments from change are never well supported by history because they are themselves deviations from the current path of history. Also, in general, the history argument as presented in the OP was basically arguing "it's not so different from how we've done things before..." as though it's obvious at all how we've done things before is good.

No it’s not. You misinterpreted this. [1] is basically banning things that test sets of skill that are different from and not tested in the rest of the game. For example, Hyrule Temple is banned because it becomes a test of teching and you will not die if you tech perfectly. Therefore, the gameplay shifts entirely to teching. It’s basically duelists in a different form.

Meta Knight, however, has proven to be very, very special. His risk/reward system seems to be totally out of whack with every other character in the game. There are already rules made specifically for him to keep him legal until now. He was already proven to have no counterpicks and to top it all off, he excels at air camping.

Teching is tested on every stage anyway; this isn't at all why the Temple needs to be banned (it needs to be banned because loop running is a broken strategy).

The only "rule" made for Meta Knight that is unversal is the IDC ban. Ice Climbers had a specific ban in melee (freeze glitch ban); it's not a big deal. There are some frankly scrubby rules about ledgestalling and such, but they're bad ideas from the start so who cares about them? He uses the same risk-reward system as everyone else (even if he's overall the safest, it's not like he's somehow different systematically). Aircamping isn't broken at all; have Mew2King or Ally ever employed it or lost to it?

One person’s opinion is not enough to jump to a conclusion on, even if he is a top level player, especially if other matches and people have proven otherwise. See: PLANK.

You too miss the point. The point is that [2] is an insanely weak criteria such that anyone's opinion instantly crushes it if they disagree. I could have cited my little sister who doesn't play smash and it would similarly crush [2]. [2] is just arguing about a subjective quality point that is easily refuted by "no it doesn't" in any case to which you'd apply it.

Yes it has been clear. Items ARE banned. Shadow Moses Island and Bridge of Eldin are banned. Regional rules do vary but not that much. Many areas ban the D3 standing infinites. Also, some areas have ledge grab limits in play.

You have no idea what I was getting at with items. Items are NOT banned. They are SET to off. I'm using the capitals here because this is a subtle point some people just refuse to understand. The regional rules do vary a lot; did you look at the Genesis stage list and how radically different it was from, say, Joker's monthly tournaments in Iowa?

…… This conflicts with you first paragraph.

Not really. I like the Brawl community; it just makes some mistakes sometimes. Even entertaining a Meta Knight ban is a mistake. It's okay; we all make mistakes. I'm sure many disagree with my assessment of what's a mistake, but the bigger point is that I want to be clear that I'm bothering to engage heavily in this community because I feel that the things I view as good outweigh the things I view as bad and expect more good than bad in the future. Of course, I'm playing my part by opposing a Meta Knight ban.

Stage striking is not always used. I though you knew this when you mentioned how different rulsets can be. Also, stage striking was almost never used in the past.
Luigi’s Mansion also rebuilds itself quickly. The point is that some people could become so good at teching that matches will run the clock because no one will die since they have several places to tech. These types of matches are not exciting to watch.

Stage striking is not always used, but it SHOULD always be used. We're talking about a rule situation here. Just because some tournaments choose to use inferior rules (such as random stages) doesn't mean that we should really consider that the game as it is (random stages are obscenely unfair, not just a little unfair, by the way).

Exciting to watch is not a criteria for a good game, but regardless, that's just not true about Luigi's Mansion. I've played a lot of Luigi's Mansion, and I've played a lot of games that have run to time. My Luigi's Mansion games have come close before, but they've never hit time. Actually intelligent mansion destruction strategies (break everything ASAP is not intelligent by the way) and actual positioning relative to the surfaces with a meaningful purpose relative to the trajectories of your moves make it very reasonable to score kills on that stage. It's frequently banned, but it's perfectly fair.

Umm….. if you even touched Meta Knight once, you should know how easy it is to play. MK does a lot of the work for you.

I know that there people who are certain that their mains can beat MK, but so far, all but Ally have consistently failed.

Meta Knight doesn't do any work for you. He has no features that automatically do moves or anything of the sort. He's an effective character, but he isn't automatic in any way whatsoever.

People beat Meta Knight all the time, not just Ally. 78% of overall tournament winningness belongs to non-Meta Knight users. Do you think they all just get lucky and never run into Meta Knight in the brackets? I won three versus Meta Knight sets at the last tournament I was at with Mr. Game & Watch. FOW won that match against Tyrant's super good Meta Knight on the livestream... with Ness! If you define "beat MK" as "consistently beat Mew2King, undeniably one of the best players in the world" then sure Ally is the only person who can even come close to claiming that. I propose an alternate explanation to Meta Knight being broken. Namely, Mew2King is really, really good at this game. He tends to win when he plays (so does Ally,; the only time a tournament with one of them attending has the result in doubt is when both are attending, as a general rule). I see results where the absolute best mostly only lose to the absolute best, and among lower levels there's a diversity of people winning with a wide variety of characters (78% isn't a small number, and Ally is less percentage wise of that 78% than Mew2King is of the 22% so factoring them out hurts Meta Knight in this comparison).

Also, Green Greens and Norfair almost always banned because of D3’s infinites on the blocks and Meta Knight abusing the ledges respectively so those stages are not dependable.

Some tournaments ban these stages, but maybe the fault rests with the stage lists that ban these stages? If a stage list is extremely character biased, we don't ban characters. We change the stage list. Norfair being broken for Meta Knight in particular is just silly and not true at all; my region has played out Meta Knight versus many other matchups on Norfair many times, and the result is that it's definitely not broken in his favor and possibly even a bad Meta Knight stage. The ledges are not very defensible even if large in number (you can easily get at them from any direction), and the stage opens up a lot of unconventional approaches. The fire also is not Meta Knight's friend; he doesn't like the ways it can zone him sometimes.

There is a difference. There are characters that counter those characters. Snake counters G&W and Pika and Zamus counter Fox, thus keeping things in order. Problem is, there is NO viable Meta Knight counter.

Do you think that you need to use a counter character to win in matchups? Snake has an advantage over Mr. Game & Watch. Mr. Game & Watch can still win. He can win against everyone. There's no character you can use to guarantee victory against Mr. Game & Watch. There's no character you can use to guarantee victory against Meta Knight. Both Mr. Game & Watch and Meta Knight strive to make games about their strengths instead of their weaknesses. Even if you argue that Meta Knight doesn't have an honestly totally insignificant minor disadvantage which is all any of the good characters really have with each other, it doesn't make him that different from the others since those "45-55" matchups don't matter. The better players are who win.

Not all of it was in caps. That’s not a good reason to ignore a post. You can still read it clearly, can’t you? That’s irrelevant as long as you can read it. Also, there was less substance in your response than in that quote.

I didn't ignore it. I pointed out it had no substance. Of course, pointing out it had no substance was itself pretty light on substance, but how do you respond to a lack of substance with substance?

Ally is the ONLY Snake that has done so. No other Snake has consistently defeated MK. Meta Knight is an aspect that doesn’t fit in with the rest of the roster as he stands out as uber on all levels of play.

This just isn't true; do the whole of the 78% not exist anymore? I can't help it if one of the two best players in the world is a Meta Knight main and if random people who main assorted characters (including Meta Knight!) can't beat him.

Also, this definition was actually clear. Read it again.

It wasn't clear at all. I demonstrated the absurdity it suggests depending on how you choose to interpret it. Any good aspect of a game makes bad aspects useless. Mr. Game & Watch does it to tons of random things that suck like Captain Falcon. That doesn't make him broken in the sense of what broken actually means, though by that definition you could say it does.

Nonsense. If Meta Knight couldn’t use his moves defensively, he wouldn’t be where he is now.

He's not really anywhere special so I'm not sure what the issue here is. His moves definitely can't be used to defend him against projectiles; feel free to try to block Pit's arrows with Meta Knight's aerials. You'll just get hit. Now try to do it with Mr. Game & Watch's back aerial. You won't get hit.

His glide attack doesn’t have transcendent priority, but all of his other sword moves do.

True. As I said, the statement that "all" of his sword moves have transcendent priority is false. We agree.

Fiction has stated that all aerials Momentum cancel the same amount months ago. MK’s uair is so fast it is the best move in the game to MC with.

Do you guys really not understand how momentum canceling works? Allow me to explain it yet again. This is easy stuff. First you use an aerial after the first half of hitstun finishes. This allows you to fastfall (though not air control) starting from whenever you start doing the aerial (that's frame 1 for all aerials). All aerials are so far identical in usefulness. Now, after your aerial finishes, you can use other moves. Some moves may be useful in canceling your momentum. Not all characters have such moves, and some characters have far better moves for donig this than others. Meta Knight's up aerial does indeed finish the fastest of all aerials. However, he doesn't have particularly good things to do after it. Therefore, it's really not that great for momentum canceling. If he had Mr. Game & Watch's bucket, it would be fantastic. He just plain doesn't have something like that.

Meta Knight’s forward smash startup is not that slow in comparison to other forward smashes. Look at Mario’s and Lucario’s fsmashes for example.

I don't have frame data handy, but I'm pretty sure it is notably slow. I don't really feel like pursuing this point though.

Dolphin Slash has a lot of landing lag. Shuttle loops has lag that can be cancelled, an arching hitbox.

Dolphin Slash is safe on hit so, if you hit with it out of shield, the landing lag doesn't matter. We're talking about using moves out of shield. Being frame 1 invincible matters way more than being safe after use since you can plow through attacks out of shield way more with Dolphin Slash than with Shuttle Loop.

Yes other characters have great moves. However, when you combine all of MK’s moves into a moveset, you have a problem. His moveset is designed to have no exploitable weakness.

Meta Knight has exploitable weaknesses. His horrible aerial mobility alone is a huge deal.

Try doing that against a decent Meta Knight. The only reason that MK got edgeguarded is because he did something wrong in recovering. When done correctly, he cannot be gimped. Period.

-Affinity- is good, and he's who I landed it against. Sure, he did "something wrong". Getting hit ever with any character is doing "something wrong". It is not a very big mistake to get hit off-stage as Meta Knight; he isn't the most mobile thing and way off-stage is really limited.

Such as? Exactly. It’s too dangerous to follow him off stage due to his high speed, high priority aerials combined with his multiple jumps, glide, and Shuttle Loop.

My character outranges all of the things he can do in the air. I'm not scared to chase him off-stage at all. A lot of characters are just really mobile out there like Jigglypuff or Wario and it's pretty safe for them. I guess you won't be doing too much chasing with someone like Olimar or Ice Climbers, but that's just common sense and playing to your strengths.

With Meta, it’s powerful in almost all of his matchups.

Also, when did Plairnkk say that? Please cite the thread or post.

I've never seen Mew2King use it to any great extent or be beaten by it. Ally either. Granted, I do just watch the livestreams of these players, but in my personal experiences and when I watch the real highest level, I don't see it working. If it fails in both of these cases (not just one or the other), I don't see how I can make any conclusion but that it's not powerful.

It's a well-known quote of his, but it would be quite hard to find indeed (it was in someone's signature who posted a lot several months ago). Plairnkk voted "no" himself and might post later; otherwise I don't think it's too productive to linger on his opinion.

MK’s horrid air mobility is offset by his jumps, glides, and Mach tornado. It makes for an excellent horizontal recovery.

Of course his recovery is excellent, but that doesn't always help him out. My example of him being really high up is a good case where he's very limited mostly due to his poor horizontal mobility.

DEHF had to do that strategy due to his options being too limited to be able to so anything else safely. This game does not encourage approaching. This game doesn’t lend itself well to aggressive play.

So just sitting back and waiting to lose was what he should have done? It's what he did; it was just obvious his strategy was guaranteed to lose. Trying anything else would have been better than what he did. When you are losing, you have to approach if your projectile game isn't working (which DEHF's obviously was not). Just not trying is not a solution; his match fails to be instructive at all because he elected not to try to win.

True, but how well have Steeler ,Zeton, and the other low tiers done at tourneys such as Genesis recently? Exactly.

Well, as much as I like Steeler on a personal level, his tournament results have never been that good (he's not bad or anything though...). Our region in general finds most travel far outside of our region prohibitively expensive, mostly because we already spend a lot just traveling within our region. Zeton does really well in general though, better on average than Stealth Raptor who was the only guy representing our region at Genesis (I bring this up for later)

Top 50 low tier placings at Genesis that I see easily...

17: Armada - Sheik
17: edrees - Peach
33: FOW - Ness
33: Excel_Zero - Peach
49: Bwett - Yoshi
49: Kosmos - Peach

Many, many of the top 50 places didn't have characters listed so there are likely many more low tier mains simply unlisted. Stealth Raptor, who I referred to earlier, was in the tied for 49th group. If Zeton had attended, it's probable that his Fox would have gotten top 50 based on that. Given the ridiculously huge scale of this tournament, this isn't bad at all. Low tiers are seeing some success with no reason to believe they wouldn't see even more success if they were used more often and had most of their representatives there, though it happens none of them got top 8 this time.

That’s because the Mansion tests skills that are not seen much in the rest of the game and the lack of stage knowledge could simply be due to it being banned so frequently.
Green Greens too.

These stages were generally allowed around here so these players surely must have played on them before. Regardless, they're fair stages that are permissible by SBR rules so there are no excuses to failing on them in tournament.

The three stages you have stated are NOT reliable because they are banned in most areas and ALWAYS banned in AN.

AN has terrible stage rules; I can't help that. Regardless, if the stage rules are a problem when it comes to Meta Knight, maybe we need to change them in the regions where too many stages are banned and there aren't enough starters.

They are all in different Context. Smash 64 and Melee are fast paced and reward offensive play. Brawl does not. The 3 smash games very different to each other. Please do your homework in Smash 64 and Melee before you bring them up.

The games aren't the same. Different styles work in different games. Why is this relevant? It's not like being really good in a defensive game is somehow more ban-worthy than being really good in an offensive game. I think Brawl rewards offense a lot more than most people seem to think anyway; there's a reason matches literally never start with both players inputting nothing and just staring each other down for 8 minutes and instead usually start with at least one player running toward the other.

It’s a problem when the margin is this wide. See: SF2HD Akuma.

HDR Akuma is a ridiculously special case that isn't really analogous to anything in any other game due to the way HDR is so tied to ST. The margin for Meta Knight isn't really that wide, if it even exists at all (it's not 100% definitive he's even the best right now). Even if he is the best in the end, I don't think it's a big deal and at worst simply analogous to someone like SFIV Sagat who is not banned and never will be banned or even considered for a ban. I don't see the point here.

There are still player that do show up from nowhere playing MK. Just look at Shadow at Mass madness before genesis. He won that thing.

Players can show up from nowhere using anyone and win if they're good. What evidence is there that Shadow isn't just plain good but was really unknown before?

I agree that soft bans are stupid. It doesn’t work at all when we all play to win.
However, the reason people don’t use MK is not always you reason. It could be other reasons like.

1. They want to place high with a low tier.

2. They want to stop him from being banned so they don’t use him.

Why people use characters is ultimately irrelevant is what it has to come down to. If Meta Knight is the only viable character, natural selection will weed out the non-Meta Knight mains. So far that's not happening at all.

Evidence in high and mid level tournaments prove this to be the future of Brawl if he isn’t banned.

No it doesn't. Non-Meta Knight characters still succeed more than Meta Knight characters in what's about a 7:2 ratio.

MK does not take as much work to play and learn. I already addressed this.

I don't see how anyone could argue that "easy" is relative to anything but purely personal factors. I find Meta Knight very awkward and hard to use (so I don't use him). I'm sure many people do find him easy. Regardless, if you want to be the best in your region, you have to actually be better than the other players. Sometimes you do this by maining Meta Knight. Sometimes you do this by maining other characters. Both cases come up. What's the problem?

NO region does it “right”. Please remember this.

The bad players never win anyway; I think we all know this. If they're flocking to Meta Knight as their attempt to try to win, they obviously don't understand why they are losing and hence the region as a whole is doing a bad job of bringing up the poor players who are looking to improve.

Exxagerated. Brawl and Melee are not on even terms and there have been SIGNIFICANTLY more Brawl tournaments than Melee in 2008 and 2009.

This actually supports my point, not contradicts it.

As Dojo’s match has shown us, the risk/reward for that situation is so absurd. He got away with it.

If I were TOing and had someone try to enter my tournament that I was quite sure had a history of cheating (particularly at events I had hosted in the past), I'd tell them after they already traveled that they weren't allowed to enter, just to make their day really suck the same way they made someone else's suck by deliberately cheating. If I hosted a tournament and had someone cheat at it, I'd never welcome them to any event by me again. If they showed up to a smashfest at my house, I'd tell them to get off my property and that I'd call the police if they came back. I might relent if they made a sincere apology for blatant cheating and did something to legitimately repent (like give back any prize money they won via cheating), but that would be about it.

There are a few isolated cases of known issues, but it's a non-issue and so isolated just because my attitude would become very common very fast if the buck started getting pushed at all.

One area’s metagame doesn’t represent the whole game, especially when many other area’s metagame has evidence.

Again, it's the combination. Both my local experience and play at the absolute highest level (Mew2King and Ally level) don't show these tactics working. Given both of these together, I find it easy to simply disregard the other data.

That match gave you proof.

Which match? If you mean the DEHF vs Dojo match, it didn't really show anything other than that not stopping camping when you are losing and time is ticking is a really bad idea.

There has been evidenvce of this for a while.

I'd love to see it. Ideally I'd see Mew2King or Ally (who basically don't do this) lose to these tactics.

Seems like you haven’t played in other areas. It’s called borderline counterppick for a reason. Many areas nowadays ban Norfair.

Sure they do, but maybe they shouldn't. If Norfair being banned (which is silly since it's a very fair stage) helps Meta Knight a lot, maybe the real big argument we should be having is to change the stage rules in regions that ban it.

No it wouldn’t. The game itself is what makes us look bad. Also, some high level players already quit Brawl regardless of MK. Jem is leaving Brawl, Gimpyfish left a while ago, and Azen quit as well.

Was Gimpyfish ever a high level Brawl player? There's a cycle of players regardless though, but at no point have we had a massive dump of players leaving the game like banning Meta Knight would create. Also, Brawl is a perfectly fine game so I don't see how it could make us look bad. We have had an event at EVO so obviously they want to try to include us, and if you read their complaints, a lot of them are that we ban way too much.

I’d like to point out there is no high level DK that has beaten MK in the past year.
I’d say the same for Ness. Even if the infinites are banned, with the exception of Ally no one has consistently topped MKs when it comes to top level tournaments.

How do infinites being banned hurt Meta Knight? The infinites in this game work against him so banning them is a bad thing if you just want to stick it to Meta Knight. Tyrant is not a bad Meta Knight at all; I'd say he's high level. He lost to FOW, a Ness main who has demonstrated himself to be a very solid player. I don't really know about DK; no one really uses DK for reasons that aren't really connected to Meta Knight (it's more like King Dedede; why even learn DK if most tournaments have him with such an unwinnable matchup?).

22% is very high for a game of 36 characters. Once again, please stop trying to compare this to other games.

22% in a game of 36 is higher and more noticeable in a game of 26.

Who cares how many characters are in the game? I don't see how that's important at all. Broken is an absolute factor, not a relative one. 22% is just as broken in a game of 8 as it is in a game of 26 as in a game of 36 as in a game of 10,000. The answer in all cases is "not at all".

As I said, the low aerial mobility is offset by his multiple jumps, 2 glides, shuttle loop, and tornado.

Metaknight’s lack of projectiles is a non issue due to how fast he is on the ground. As Overswarm has stated, after his ROB fires 1 laser, MetaKnight is already up close.

What if Meta Knight is in the air? Then he can't move fast unless he wants to commit to all sorts of risky things. You can't ignore the insanely common circumstance of being in the air.

The lack of duration is not an issue if they are very fast and powerful. A lot of Snake’s hitboxes lasts for no more than 3 frames.

It's always an issue; the attacks have other great qualities, but it's not like you can use a strength as a reason a weakness doesn't matter. Even if the strength is good more than the weakness is bad, the weakness is still bad. I mean, no one is going to deny it. Meta Knight is truly a fantastic character. It doesn't mean he's good at everything.

Not that bad of a jump break compared to most of the cast. Meta has many options to almost guarantee himself not to get grabbed due to his air game and lagless aerials and specials.

Everyone gets grabbed in every matchup to some extent. It's why Ice Climbers are a decent character. Also, his is particularly bad; it's in the bottom half of the cast seeing as he's a part of the less than half of the cast that Yoshi can chaingrab. The only other characters who are "short" and hence forced to air break in many matchups and also have bad jump breaks (chaingrabbed by Yoshi) are Lucas, Squirtle, and Wario.

That’s a non-issue in most stages, unless you are playing on SMI or Bridge of Eldin, both of which are banned because of D3. MK KO’s excellently horizontally.

It matters in a lot of circumstances, such as being on a low ceiling stage or just being center-stage in general.

MK’s jab is not that bad. One medicre move does not make up for the rest of them.

The point was simply that not all of his moves are fantastic. Like all characters, he has gems and he has duds. Being overall really good it will be mostly gems, but it's not all gems.

AA, your post was simply too long to expect a response in a short time.
If this post isn’t responded to today, it only proves my point.

I suppose it's 2 minutes after midnight, but it's within 24 hours. Also, please do link back to your other post; I didn't mean to neglect it. I do feel you are really wrong, but I appreciate the effort to address a longer argument.

I will disappear in about 9 hours until Sunday which probably effectively ruins my ability to respond to it... I'm sorry; I can't help that.

 

[En.Ee.Oh]

names are listed in polls alphabetically.



think what you want, but i've thoroughly examined both arguments while playing a neutral role on both sides of the debate. i've made my decision based on the facts, not for my own individual gain.



what evidence seems to indicate that i've "clearly done nothing to learn the MK matchup whatsoever?"

i think you are the biased one here.

I've watched you play vs MK and you make a lot of bad decisions so it just looks like you don't know what you're doing.

My bad though I thought you were just on some Fiction type sh*t and just wanted MK gone because he beats you, my apologies xD

 

[Atlus8]

Capcom presents . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t3q_Yx4VPo&feature=related

 

[DFat2]

The Entire point of the Thread has derrailed into many sub sequent themes. And the Fact that there are many reasons why people want him banned, all be it that not every one has the same or just one reason, cannot be ignored that willingly just because the whole "Cant Beat him" topic or the "I generally don't know the match up as well" point of view (this being objective reasons, but one of the more thrown arround ones without any foundation).

The main reason that is being discussed right now is the validity and variety of different characters, that by consequence of banning MK, could be liable for tournament play.

I understand that this is an absurd reason, and not very deserving of a ban, seing as obviously, Metaknight cannot be the ONLY reason they arent tournament viable.

But take this for example, "Posted by Fiction", who is arguably the person that goes Toe to Toe with M2K using Wario, not MK:

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7972536&postcount=965

There arent any oppinions untill the end of the post, just facts. I think that this information was very overlooked. Not mentioned enough. But, since the argument is self explained/no way to actually find a way to take it out of context, possibly people didn't bother.

Cope that with the fact tha brawl doesn't require "That" much Technicallity, it's easier to play without flaws. Which is why I think that the fact of comparing Brawl to Melee or SF games is futile. Not the same level of dexterity, there fore, Not the same level of mistakes at hand.
______________________

The other Main issue is that, It's effectively the SBR's decission anyways, since the mayority/a small amout of people vote yes for personal gains, and not thinking entirely on the reasons as to why.

Furthermore, I think that if the Character is even considered for a Ban, it's obviously one of the most important things to look into. The "Why He Should Be Banned".

Obviously, whe cant' look into other fighting games for a "When to Ban" list because, we cant compare street fighters standars to Smash games, or Brawl in general Standards.
______________________

There's also the Fact issue of questionable high placers that Play MK. I don't know about US, but in PR, there are (or at least where) mediocre players that placed very high with MK. And I don't mean back in the beggining, I mean after the match up was completely oppened and searched through every nook and cranny, to find all possible sources and resources for ways to deffeat him, which brings me to my next point, wich is:

The "Match Up Itself". The Match up, is already exploited. We know every option the character has. And I mean We, not ritorically, but literally as in the whole smash community.

Take Fictions earlier Post as an example. With what he said, it's obvious that he knows the match up from top to bottom, as well as MK's weaknesses:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4u0W23F4K8

This Video It's debate able, but I'm not trying to come across with the fact that MK Beats wario, or that M2K > Fiction. But more the Fact that, Most of the things he stated about the match up are true (Uair through Air Dodge puts you at a disadvantage if you're not MK, Sword being Transcendant, ect.).

Now, seeing as all of this is true, he should find a way to counter every powerfull thing that MK has, but that would mean finding a way to counter his entire Move Pool. Wich in Retrospect, Is generally accepted in fighting games, seeing it as "Taking your game to you're Fullest", but I'm finding it hard to convince myself that learning a way to counter 14 is the answer to an Anti Ban. Not just me, but every player that want's to deffeat MK.

What about the players that use a Certain Character like, let's say, DeDeDe. They have to find a Way to Deffeat IC's, SZZ and Olimars. And Snakes have to find way's to deffeat Olimars and Pikachu's. (and Falcos*).
______________________

I havent read every ones oppinion (Pro ban and Anti ban sides), but I have read the mayority of the more recent posts, and I'm seeing that Both sides of the argument are concentrating on one important factor, but not THE only important factor.

tl; dr: Sorry no tl; dr. I think that you should have a well informed decision before you vote anyways.

*Now to wait for people to pass by post and move along :/*

 

[e__]

Midwest can't be considered for tournament results because we're too spread out in general to have many people regularly go to tournaments.