Alright. I don't really care. I'm going to ask for an unban, and if he's not unbanned, I won't go. Neither will my friends. Simple as that.
Okay.
And the MK ban ****ed with the brawl metagame, caused silly drama, and for all intents and purposes, weakened the brawl community all over the world. It's a stupid scrub mentality, and yes, I was hoping we were past it, as it's clear MK is not broken by any means.
Messed with the metagame? How so?
The guys who don't even play brawl (at least not competitively) should not be making uninformed decisions. So I am going to inform them. You can argue if you want, but at this point, it would undoubtably hurt attendance, and also not allow other new players (and spectators) to see how brawl is really played in a competitive environment.
1. And YOU should be the one making the decisions? Your act of 'informing' is quite literally going to be
I'm going to ask for an unban, and if he's not unbanned, I won't go.
Along with trying to coerce them into unbanning him by threatening attendance. I'm cool with you informing them, if you were going to represent both sides of the argument. But you're not.
2. It will only undoubtably hurt attendance because you are making it so. This is pretty much a form of blackmail.
3. This is a legitimate point. But I highly doubt that the tournament creators care.
So you can go ahead and bank on the TO's ignorance and assert your illogical bias, but i'm going to try and make it an actual event, so that maybe we can get more people playing and viewing brawl (and P:M).
How am I 'banking on the TO's ignorance' or asserting illogical bias? I mean, illogical bias is a thing, but it hardly applies to either of us. I have such a dedication to logic that people consistently refuse to talk to me because of such. I have probably the least bias of anyone save someone who doesn't play the game, and it's in no way illogical.
Your bias is of course logical. You want to win, and you want to use mk because it will make doing so the easiest.
It doesn't matter if you think he's lame. He is not broken, and that's the point.
Define broken.
Also, you think that banning a character who "half of BC" plays, in a game that is already majorly suffering due to attendance, is the greatest idea?
Is this 'half of bc' that you're talking about even relevant to the tournament in question?
I want to keep playing brawl. I want more people to keep playing brawl. Banning MK at this point is absolutely silly. Even talking about it is silly. If you aren't a legit enough gamer to admit that it's personal bias at this point, then there is obviously no arguing.
I want to be able to play brawl in as balanced a state as possible. This is no more and no less a good goal than yours.
If you are going to make claims (wanting to ban mk = personal bias) back them up.
No proof = no point, essentially. Also, this discussion would be really cool, but I doubt you will follow through. I hope I am wrong.
:fluttershy: