Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
But what proof do we have of MK being broken other than top MK players consistently placing in the money
Melee Fox and 64 Pikachu also have no disadvantageous MUs. The ledge grab limit is enforced on all characters. FD is a bad stage for MK.
Even though I don't believe you, that still leaves SSB 64 Pikachu. In SOCAL we've always had the LGL set to 35 for every character and there was never a problem. I don't know why the BBR thinks that every other character needs 50 ledge grabs. They've also already found proof that MK's perfect planking is beatable.
What else does he need? he has no bad MUs.
I have shown proof that MK players can win tournaments even without having to use MK. If MK is really the only reason that we have a LGL, then why is it that the BBR added it to the rule set after Will (DK) planked his way to victory against Rich brown?
Perhaps massively better recovery options, the best planking in the game, and ridiculous over centralization mean something too? Oversimplification is a logical fallacy for a reason.
Was it ever argued that they wouldn't? The very top of any game tend to be there for more than just a character; a MK ban, however, would have a direct, proven positive impact on mid-high level play, as well as make Brawl a more interesting game for spectators.
Well then I guess we can't blame only MK for the LGL. I also like how smashers naturally assume a player is sand bagging or isn't trying when they don't place where they think they should. It always happens with Mango.
What are you talking about? He did go Marth. There were two really good DDDs in that tournament so I don't think he would have used Marth in that MU. He also needed a character that would be good on stages like RC and Brinstar.
Zekey is a ranked player. DSF, Vato Break, Commander Beef and Bardull were all ranked at some point (Beef was supposed to be ranked but he didn't want to be in the rankings). DEHF, Rich Brown and Havok still have trouble playing against Mike. These results would pretty much stay the same if MK wasn't banned.
Lol? Marth is amazing on Brinstar and pretty good on RC too (just not so much vs MK).
Marth is not good on Brinstar or RC. He's just a really good character. He loses to characters who do not get completely owned by him and are good on those stages.
Look at it this way. If this tournament was not MK banned, Tyrant's winnings would be added to MK's winnings which is the reason why MK makes so much of the money. It's not the character, it's the player.Tyrant and Tearbear are really good, yes. I don't think anyone debates that. The fact that those two are better players than everyone else there doesn't = MK being broken or not broken.
MK doesn't have to do with anything there.
I could have said: "Fonz won an MK banned tournament in the Midwest. This means MK is broken." and I would look equally as dumb to the people who replied to you as you might look to them.
One of Tearbears posts on AIB: "the tourny sets between me and tyrant were kinda gay cause it was just CPing
There is nothing wrong with what we have. All I see is top players winning with a top tier character. Take that character away from them and the will be winning with their next best character. Take that one away from them and they will still be winning with their next best character.Compared to what we have? Yes.
Why don't you prove that he isn't by winning the next national without him?
MK wins, but that's just a results of MK having more options. If MK plays like Marth plays, he wins. Otherwise, he loses. A defensive MK won't beat a marth.
