Ideas about MK

[Rajam]

ok, I know the MK debate has been forever, and there have been many threads about banning MK and discussing the MK issue. I don't want to go into this again, I only want to propose two ideas. I don't know if these ideas have been proposed before. Also, if the answer is a big no, at least tell me why before closing the topic.

1: All matches besides Finals are best of 3 games. I propose, that anyone defeating an MK just once (just one game) be declared as the winner of the match. It doesn't matter which character you picked; if you defeated an MK just one game, you win. In contrast, the MK user would have to defeat you in two games as usual. In finals it could be the same thing, just changing the number of times from 1 to 2 which you have to defeat an MK to win.

2: Limiting MK so he can only be used no more than once on each match, and maybe no more than twice in Finals. It wouldn't matter if you use MK in the first or the last game, but with this it will be impossible to win a match using only MK.

discuss

 

[Flayl]

If the use of MK needed to be limited for him to not be game-breaking, then he would be considered broken and banned.

Also you're not the first person to suggest this.

 

[Prawn]

TBH the only good rule I've seen like this is that MK is only allowed to CP neutrals.

 

[some-guy]

Maybe just give someone a handicap so MK always starts at XX% or something.

 

[Nic64]

Maybe just give someone a handicap so MK always starts at XX% or something.

This actually makes him better in some matchups.

 

[Nitrix]

MK isn't dominating enough in the metagame to warrant a ruleset akin to this

 

[Lore]

TBH the only good rule I've seen like this is that MK is only allowed to CP neutrals.

I like this idea.

OP you're not the first to suggest this, as others have already said. Besides he isn't overpowered to the point of having huge, overcomplicated rulesets against him.

At the MOST, he should be limited to only CP'ing neutrals (like Prawn said), but since he still does well on neutrals anyway, it won't make that much of a difference. However, it would still be much more reasonable than outright banning him/using something similar to what the OP said. >_>

Maybe just give someone a handicap so MK always starts at XX% or something.

With a handicap, Mk can't be chaingrabbed/something similar by most of the characters that have one against him.

 

[Demp]

IMO, he should either be banned or not. Nothing in between.

 

[some-guy]

With a handicap, Mk can't be chaingrabbed/something similar by most of the characters that have one against him.

O right, I almost forgot about that. Dx

 

[deepseadiva]

If the use of MK needed to be limited for him to not be game-breaking, then he would be considered broken and banned.

Basically this.

Admitting that MK needs some sort of handicap is admitting that he's broken - at which point he needs to be banned. All these little rules against him is just dancing around the issue. Which is really dumb.

 

[llamapaste]

Metaknight isn't broken, just a little overpowered. I'm confident that with the game less than two years old that certain characters have room to do better against him, although he'll still me the number one character in the game for as long as we are having tournaments.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

MK is broken, but it has already been said once in this thread:

Either he is broken or he isn't. If he's broken, ban him. If he's not broken, let him continue to plank and scrooge his way to victory.

 

[Prawn]

imo mk is broken on a lot of counterpicks

and just a really good character on neutrals.

 

[MKOwnage]

Unless Meta Knight starts to win every single tournament in the next year I will not admit he is broken. Until that day comes he is beatable and has every right to be in tournaments as any other character. I use to think Meta Knight was the best in the game and broken and considered no longer maining him. However I realized characters like Snake and Diddy Kong have a lot of potential as well. Back on topic though. I think they just ban him if they are going to do something stupid like that.

 

[Allied]

you guys really need to chill with this metaknight thing hes not this good lol XD

inb4 ALLIED HES REALLY GOOD

attend more tournaments and learn the matchup simple as that


not being mean either just saying its too much stupidness over easy MK (i expect some smart *** remark now trying to insul;t me lol XD)

 

[solecalibur]

you guys really need to chill with this metaknight thing hes not this good lol XD

inb4 ALLIED HES REALLY GOOD

attend more tournaments and learn the matchup simple as that


not being mean either just saying its too much stupidness over easy MK (i expect some smart *** remark now trying to insul;t me lol XD)

This idea of limiting MK is a terrible idea IMO Ban or dont ban him
but MK is "really good"

 

[GreenFox]

They need to ban MK defintley.

 

[Inferno3044]

Idea 1 is just stupid. It's completely unfair that MK has to beat someone twice but if they lose once they lose. Especially since certain characters don't have much difficulty with MK. I can learn someone like Snake, Wario, or Falco and I'm good. This is such a big handicap on him that he wouldn't be anything near top tier. High tier might be generous to call MK with a handicap like this.

I really don't think that MK should get any special nerf. It's just unfair. It's not fair to have MK be unable to CP a stage to help him when everyone else can. You might as well say Falco can't CP Japes and Wario can't CP Brinstar. Handicapping won't work. It's either ban him or not.

 

[.AC.]

maybe games should be 2 stocks and the time limit should be raised.

 

[SZ2K]

Metaknight needs a full ban, nothing less. He kills a lot of character's chances to be tournament viable. Brawl, regardless of what anyone thinks, really is a pretty balanced game. I've seen characters like Olimar, Pikachu, and Tink make it really far in tourneys just to be knocked out by sometimes even sub-par MKs. Even a sonic player in this tourney I attended recently got third place with very reputable players. There's so much potential in a lot of characters because they can be played effectively by truly skilled players, but this is nullified by the uber gayness of MK. Sure, this is an an opinion, but with that I believe MK is killing the game. It wouldn't be fair to put these weird rules on MK, as much as I would love to have em, it'd be messed up. Either MK has to be banned to let a game with great competitive potential have a diverse and fun community. Or we can just keep playing the same way, leaving anyone with an affinity for any character but top-tier as merely a contributor to the pot that ends up in the hands of the Scrooge that plays MK.

PS lawlz story: At my local mall where really small tourneys used to be held, I would always go really far with Marth. One time I was playing against a Wolf player and it was a pretty good match, but I knew there was enough of a skill-gap that I could probably beat him regardless. So I ended up choosing Metaknight for the second game. At this point I had no real experience playing as Metaknight, only playing against. Even now I haven't spent much time playing as MK. But back then I actually did a lot better with my first-time MK then I did with my Marth. While my Marth clearly controlled the game, my MK just dominated. I spammed nado to punish his movelag if I was too far for a d-smash. And it seemed like anytime he tried to recover, off-stage d-airs and up+B were way more than enough to completely **** the guy. I had no practice with the character, but when it comes to amateur players it really doesn't take much skill to get an advantageous position with metaknight. Although now my Marth is probably leaps and bounds better than an attempt at MK, it's just a funny story I always remember about MK. And I know the responses to this are going to be about how amateur play doesn't matter, its only the peak of professional play that can warrant any kind of game changing rule. I do agree with this ideal mostly, and my story isn't to be used as a basis for an argument to ban MK, but it's just a presentation of his over-poweredness.

Rant over, phew, that's probably the longest post I've ever conjured up. Shwow

 

[.AC.]

^dedede makes more characters unviable than mk ,your post makes no sense.

 

[Ripple]

^dedede makes more characters unviable than mk ,your post makes no sense.

as DMG would say

"Dedede can't take away character viability if they never had to begin with"

dedede only makes DK unviable since he's the only one that doesn't shoot himself in the foot and isn't low tier.

God I wish Dedede wasn't in this game. having a 0-100 (not literally, but darn near close) matchup is not fun

 

[LuigiKing]

MK ***** Luigi a lot worse than D3 does, and thats taking into account the infinite.

And yes, I am serious.

 

[AvaricePanda]

I've seen characters like Olimar,

MK is not his worst match-up.

Pikachu,

MK is not his worst match-up.

and Tink

Okay.

make it really far in tourneys just to be knocked out by sometimes even sub-par MKs.

I've seen players get really far in tourneys just to be knocked out by sometimes even sub-par other players. What does this prove? Who specifically were these players? What were these tournaments?

These players must not have been great with their respective mains if sub-par MKs beat them.

Even a sonic player in this tourney I attended recently got third place with very reputable players.

What does this have to do with MK? I know of great mains of lower-tier characters as well. Dapuffster got 33rd at Pound4 using mainly Jiggs. There's Shugo in the MW who places high with Sonic, among others. These are great players who are able to overcome disadvantageous match-ups.

There's so much potential in a lot of characters because they can be played effectively by truly skilled players, but this is nullified by the uber gayness of MK.

How does a character existing prevent other people from being good with their character? Even supposing a character had a 10-90 match-up against MK but had normal middle-low tier match-ups against the rest of the cast, they could still be as good as possible and just not play MKs.

A specific character can not prevent another person or group of people from getting good with their character. A horrible match-up can stop a character from advancing far in tournaments, such as Sheik and Pikachu against Fox, but the character still can be as good as its mains let him to be.

The argument that, "An MK ban will allow potential in other characters to be unlocked," is horrid.

Either MK has to be banned to let a game with great competitive potential have a diverse and fun community. Or we can just keep playing the same way, leaving anyone with an affinity for any character but top-tier as merely a contributor to the pot that ends up in the hands of the Scrooge that plays MK.

Read above.

Also, please find the results of any large MK-banned tournament where mid-low tier characters are able to consistently take the top spots, if not win.

Heck, please find results of any competitive fighting tournament where characters that aren't top tier are able to consistently take the top spots, if not win, regional or national tournaments.

irrelevant story

You said it yourself; amateur play doesn't matter. MK is not the only character that can do this to lower tiered characters with bad match-ups. You could have switched to D3 for the same results.

It's match-ups, not the notion that "MK is the best character which means he 90-10s everyone C tier and below!"

I'm not sure why I even did this. I guess I'm just trying to say that banning a character isn't a, "oh whatever I don't like it that much ban" or, "well I main him he isn't even that broken get good." This is a serious decision that will impact the future of competitive Brawl for months if not years to come.

These arguments have been said millions of times in past threads that aren't hard to find at all. Read those threads instead of bringing the same thing to the table which has already been said or refuted 10 times.

It's redundant and annoying. There's no point for another, "Ban MK?" thread if people are going to make them the exact same as the others.

 

[itsthebigfoot]

MK ***** Luigi a lot worse than D3 does, and thats taking into account the infinite.

And yes, I am serious.

I recommend that people take every post about mk from idaho with a grain of salt. no offense to you luigiking, but you live in the only mk banned area, so there might be a little bias.

^dedede makes more characters unviable than mk ,your post makes no sense.

as DMG would say

"Dedede can't take away character viability if they never had to begin with"

dedede only makes DK unviable since he's the only one that doesn't shoot himself in the foot and isn't low tier.

God I wish Dedede wasn't in this game. having a 0-100 (not literally, but darn near close) matchup is not fun

MK makes a lot of unviable characters less viable as well. Rob and Peach are the only characters i see being unviable due to mk, and even then, snake vs peach is just as bad.

DDD takes out dk and wolf, so it's about even in who they make unviable. DDD just does it with one entirely ******** move, whereas mk makes them unviable by just being plain better.

and yes, wolf would be viable without ddd, i've seen camaman take on larry/mks, it's entirely possible, you just have to be gay enough to time them out