Clai, do the anti-ban side a favor and stop representing them so strongly in this thread. The argument would be a lot better without someone like you being so active in it.
I feel very, very strongly against the ban, so I'm going to argue for the anti-ban side until my brain explodes. And how exactly is the anti-ban side going to be better without me? I respond to everyone's points, detail by detail, using the criteria that have existed for decades. I've been giving points that are clearly evidenced by the performance of the other players. If you're discrediting me because I'm not following your delusion that Metaknight is ban-worthy, you are full of yourself.
You got pissed at me for posing a very serious question
I got pissed because you asked the exact same question in this thread and I already answered it, and then, without giving any type of remark about my previous answer, you ask the question again; you either completely ignored my last remark or just thrown it out all together. That's why I'm pissed.
which to me, your answer does no justice to. You can't blame me for not seeing your reasoning in this thread before, as not only is this the first time I have asked this question in this thread, you can't expect me to read almost all 5500 posts.
If you give me a few minutes, I'll search up the thread and find the post where've you asked the question and the post I used to answer it.
I have a life, and frankly there are other better threads to worry about on the subject for me, such as the SBR version of this.
Okay, so you go do that and leave me to argue my points on this thread without you being on your high-horse about that, 'kay?
MetaKnight does over-centralize the game. And if you don't consider at this point that he does, then wait a little longer and check it out again. It's inevitable. There is no reason beyond favoritism or play-style that anyone would not play MetaKnight if EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER other than MetaKnight has a bad matchup.
Metaknight is centralizing the metagame, we agree that much. Metaknight's the best character in the game, he deserves to centralize the metagame. We agree, that, in a vacuum, Metaknight would be the best choice because he has no bad matchups.
Where we disagree, though, is that you think Metaknight is worthy of being banned because you are completely theorizing in a vacuum. As for my theories, they come from reality, where tournaments are proving again and again that Metaknight is not centralizing the game enough to be considered overcentralizing. It would be considered overcentalizing if Metaknight's presence forced players to either counterpick MK with MK or lose, not just in a vacuum, but in reality. However, many characters have reasonable, and I repeat, reasonable (just because you don't have an advantage on Metaknight doesn't mean you don't have a reasonable chance of winning) changes of beating Metaknight, and tournaments and the performances of players prove that to be the case.
If MetaKnight was removed from the game, there would still be a best character. What would be different about this character though is that they would have a bad matchup somehow.
Just because Metaknight banned would create the ideal situation where even the best character can be counterpicked, doesn't mean we have to do it. Games aren't ideal, and we can't force them to be if it violates the principles of fighting games that have existed for years.
Tournaments would consistently have varied results, as any character could potentially run into their bad matchup at some point in the bracket. If the said player learns a secondary to cover this bad matchup, then their secondary as well would have a bad matchup (and if they were playing the best character in the game, then they would be secondarying a worse character).
You're imagining an ideal situation. Guess what? Games don't have to be ideal. Brawl isn't balanced. Brawl has one best character instead of several. As long as he's not dominating the game (and tournaments have proven again and again that Metaknight is not dominating the game), then we have to deal with it.
In the current situation anyone who loves their character, whether it be Ganondorf or ROB, can pick up MetaKnight as an easy secondary which 100% covers every single bad matchup they have.
Again, you're talking about in a vacuum. If they love Ganondorf or R.O.B. put end up using Metaknight because of matchup problems, then they're playing to win. A character's ease of matchups does not equal ban when that character is not overcentralizing the metagame (which I've discussed) or dominating the tournament scene (which tournaments, again, have proven)
At the top of every tournament scene in every region there will always be a MetaKnight lingering up there
Ally and whatever region of Canada and the Midwest he's in say hi.
in the very rare case that the skill of the best MetaKnight is far inferior to other players (such as PA, though it's not a full region (so I can use an example you can relate to), you can see that the only MetaKnight main we have is Xzax, whose skill is inferior to those like Vex and Rogue Pit, however when either of those two players pick up MetaKnight (which they both have), they both instantly have more success than Xzax).
Vex and Rogue Pit are far better players than Xzax. They understand the principles of spacing, when to be aggressive, when to be defensive, etc. etc. better than Xzax. So when Vex and Rogue Pit pick up Metaknight, of course they're going to have more success than Xzax, even when Xzax has practiced Metaknight more than them, because those two are simply superior players. This game is about a lot more than just character selection, or else you can just pick a character on the selection screen and the game would just skip to the results and say the better character won.
In the East there's M2k (and Spammer when he played), in the Midwest there's Judge, in the Southwest there's Dojo, and in the West there is Tyrant.
So top players from different regions all main Metaknight. Big whoop. If all of those players moved to Florida, and the new top players for those regions main characters who aren't Metaknight, would you be still complain? M2K, Dojo, Judge and Tyrant would still be doing really good and placing high at national tournaments, but we'd remove this silly assumption that since one player who's on top of his region just happens to main Metaknight, that it's somehow a measurement of the character and not the player.
Of course there are some grey areas such as Ally whether he is Midwest or Canada, though it's been shown that Canada has lately had such a MetaKnight problem that they are on the verge of banning him.
Ontario is a region full of scrubs. How dare you associate Ally with that region. That's like saying because a bunch of hicks from Montana banned Metaknight, then that somehow takes away from everything the top non-Meta mains from this country do .
Even if Ally is this shining hope of glory, outside maybe 3 Snakes in the whole country, there is no other that has proven to be so successful amongst the number of MetaKnights.
Okay, here's where I'm going to slow down and repeat points that I've stated about a thousand times before:
When the best character is also the most overused character, that character is going to have better tournament placings than all the other characters.
When the best character is also the most overused character, there are going to be more top players using Metaknight than all the other characters.
Metaknight is still not over-centralizing the metagame,
Metaknight is not forcing top, or even high-level players to either counterpick Metaknight with Metaknight or lose.
We do not live in a vacuum; many players are able to place high and even win regional/national tournaments without having to use Metaknight, even when every time they fight a Metaknight, they risk being in a slight disadvantage.
Metaknight is not dominating the tournament scene.
Metaknight has nothing that makes him any more than the best and most overused character in the game,
Metaknight does not deserve to be banned.
