Marth in Ankoku's List for MLG Events

[JackieRabbit5]

i don't see a temporary ban as being realistic b/c if he is banned than ppl won't want to go back and MK will always be considered unfair....so the decision has to be made carefully

i'm still on the fence

 

[Deoxys]

Wow, you are so desperate to win this argument that you brought up a point that has been countered MANY times? And please don't tell me it hasn't. I'll gladly go to the SBR thread and C/P exactly what has been said.

Please do. We don't all have purple names.

 

[Jam Stunna]

I know that Azen used Captain Falcon in the grand finals for VLS, and KDJ used Marth against Chu Dat in loser's finals.

 

[AlphaZealot]

This doesn't, however, deny the fact that, at the top echelon of play, there is potential for other characters to excel, even win.

And yet over the span of Melee's lifespan, it was proven that if you wanted to win large tournaments on a consistent basis, you had to use Marth. No other character came close to achieving the number of consistent wins, every year, starting from the beginning of Melee's national scene, as Marth. It was Ken, then it was Azen, then it was M2K. There were only brief periods where any character surfaced to challenge Marth, and those characters were eventually replaced by another Marth player. It wasn't just Ken who at some period was the best in the world, it was Ken, Azen, and M2K, two of which played other characters near the peak of their playing ability, and both of which went with Marth almost entirely when money was on the line. One argument for banning MK stipulates that switching to MK improves your tournament results. This same comparison can be made with M2K, when he switched (and was one of it not THE best) from Fox to Marth and suddenly became the best player in the country in 2007. The only players to net national tournament victories aside from Marth players were KDJ, Mango, ChuDat, and PC Chris (and Isai in 2005), none of which did it repeatedly or on the same consistent basis as Marth.

I'm not saying Marth should be banned. I'm saying based on the actual results of tournaments, Marth is in the same realm as MK. The difference is Marth dominated for about 4 years (btw, M2K won a 112 person Melee tournament last weekend, I wonder who he used?), MK has only been dominating for about 3 months.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Of course it makes sense to use a top tier character. Overall they do have a much better chance of winning than those below them, its common sense.

Yet you keep to be missing the point that needs to be addressed. To what extent did Marth dominate the game?
If we look only at large tournaments yes, Marth dominates just a little bit less than Metaknight does.
However, if we only go by national tournaments the amount of results is not enough.
Hence where the local tournaments which are smaller (but not overly small) come into play. We know for a fact that the ratio of bad to good players doesn't vary by a significant amount and the amount of local tournaments far outweigh those of the massive national ones.

If you look at all the tournaments Marth does NOT dominate as much as MK does. Marth did indeed dominate(no one denies this) but the extent to which he dominanted is lesser than MK.

This is primarily why MK is being looked at, while Marth was a dominating character, MK is a much more dominating character.
Yes he should be number 1 he is top tier and arguably the best one. Yet the extent to which he beats out other characters is what matters most as well as his effect on the system.

Does Marth cause issues with the CP system? No.
Does MK? Yes.

TO what extent though is what needs tob e looked at and addressed. I Feel its too early, not enough data, emtagame is still growing 9though it grows fast indeed).

 

[AlphaZealot]

Are you saying that local tournaments with less talent should be taken more seriously then national tournaments, where the best talent is?

Granted, you aren't the only one saying that, it seems to be a common theme: ban MK because at locals bad people can't compete with likewise bad or mediocre MK's! Then the bad people leave the Brawl scene because of MK!

 

[ShadowLink84]

Are you saying that local tournaments with less talent should be taken more seriously then national tournaments, where the best talent is?

1. No.

2.I am not going to address the second paragraph because it comes off as extremely stupid and rude. So since I am going to assume that I am reading it improperly I will ignore it. Don't post anything like it again please.

3. Now I shall address your argument. I am not saying we take it more seriously. In fact, nothing I have said has even insinuated such a thing. I am saying however that the local tournaments MUST be taken into account because the ratio of good players vs. bad players does not change significantly enough to warrant ignoring them. While they are lower level in terms of play they are not low level where it should not be taken into account. Local tournaments should be taken into account because they occur more often, and so reflect the changes in the metagame more accurately than National Tournaments where you have large skips. Which is good for looking at things individually but really bad for evaluating things holistically.

 

[Kizzu-kun]

History lesson: Smashers can't deal properly with character bans, because never needed to ban a character before.

 

[Justblaze647]

History lesson: Smashers can't deal properly with character bans, because never needed to ban a character before.

But that doesn't mean we'll never need to...

 

[ShadowLink84]

History lesson: Smashers can't deal properly with character bans, because never needed to ban a character before.

Translation: Anyone who has never needed to do a character ban doesn't know what to do.

Wait what?
I guess the SC, GG and MvC communities have no clue what to do then. >_>

 

[Punishment Divine]

People are still comparing Brawl to Melee?

Hmm...

 

[The Real Inferno]

I feel all of this information is not needing it's own topic and this and Ulevo's topic should both just be part of the current Meta topic, considering that topic was made to prevent other topics about Meta from popping up. Even though this topic -appears- to be about Marth (in melee, which would technically make it a Melee Comparing to Brawl thread) we all know that's not the case, so it's not really deserving of its own topic beyond attention grabbing.

 

[RP`]

Let's ban Marth from Melee now.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

My argument to ban Metaknight has always included the idea that he was the best character in the game. Marth is considered the second best character in Melee according to the SBR tier list. He apparantly wasn't dominant enough for backroom memebers to even consider him the best. Heck, he was third or fourth best for much of the tier list. Not even close to the dominance meta has.

You can compare any two random tournaments, but that isn't a scientific comparison by any means. I could just as easily pick a tournament where the top 10 are all metas and compare it to a Melee tournament with more character variety - like when a jigglypuff won pound 3. but the fact of the matter is most people didn't even consider marth the best character, and for that alone he can't be considered with the same breath as Metaknight.

Basically, if there was a list of "what is necessary to ban a character" it would be a substantial list, but TWO of the elements would be

-Universally agreed upon as the best character

-Dominant tournament results

Metaknight falls under both but marth only falls under the second, so it is not a good comparison to make.

 

[Plum]

My problem:

1) Everyone who says MK dominates the metagame is completely ignorant.
MK has disadvantages. Bowser and Yoshi can now play on much fairer grounds due to new strategies like grab release chains, he is a light character so killing him should not be as hard as people make it out to be. The people playing MK are human, ergo make mistakes. Punish them and get an early kill due to his light weight. Because of his dominance essentially every character has to develop anti-MK strategies. Read character boards and you will be surprised on some of the viable options.

2) Matchup charts are flawed. Don't rely on them.
Just because you read a general all character matchup chart and it said MK beats Snake, don't trust this. Snake still retains field control, MK has issues dealing with grenades, really early U-tilt kills, etc
Even M2K agrees that MK has issues with top level Olimars. And let me guess, "MK ***** Olimar, his recovery sucks." Again look at the Olimar boards, he has a lot of options to solve any problem he has. Have you tried to gimp an Olimar only to have him use his whistle to go through your attack and spike you and tether back? I've done it!
Characters can do more than most of us think.

3) How many of MK's matchups are a 60/40 in his favor? I think we can agree that a 60/40 is not an instant loss. In theory you know your character better than the MK does, so just make sure to know equally as much about what MK can do to you. Knowledge is power and can turn a 60/40 around in your favor.

4) How to break a game: Other characters have absolutely no options against you. You dominate the game no matter what. You beat players that are better in skill just because you use this character. The metagame revolves purely around you.
I don't think MK fits ANY of these categories. The pure fact that MK has neutral match ups goes against the first. There is solid proof of at top level play, other characters win. Top level players will **** you even if you play a decent local level MK. Don't even argue against that one. Smashboards are solid proof that the metagame does not revolve around MK.

5) If we ban MK do other characters become viable?
No. We will see the other top tiers and high tiers win more often instead. Banning MK will not make Jigglypuff, Sonic, or any other way down there characters viable at top level play. I don't know exactly but I can almost guarantee at least one other character in the high or top tiers take out these characters just as hard as MK or potentially harder. Every other character will just remain at that potential maybe if the best person at the tourney is using said character.

6) Even if MK is banned here, the rules the SBR create are a RECOMMENDATION.
Is every single TO out there going to ban a character that can legitimately be beaten?
Unless the TO is a complete idiot, I doubt it.

 

[kr3wman]

Isn't it because Ken was too good with Marth, and not really Marth's too good so everyone uses him?

 

[rehab]

The tier list "rates" Marth and Fox at the same level out of 10 (9.9) and a significant amount of top players consider him the best character in that game.

 

[choknater]

all the top best players consider fox and marth even, they are tied on the tier list, and they have the "most even matchup" in all of melee.

 

[ShadowLink84]

My problem:

1) Everyone who says MK dominates the metagame is completely ignorant.
MK has disadvantages. Bowser and Yoshi can now play on much fairer grounds due to new strategies like grab release chains, he is a light character so killing him should not be as hard as people make it out to be. The people playing MK are human, ergo make mistakes. Punish them and get an early kill due to his light weight. Because of his dominance essentially every character has to develop anti-MK strategies. Read character boards and you will be surprised on some of the viable options.

At best they go neutral with him. let alone the fact it is very difficult to grab MK because of the fact that he zones Yoshi and outspeeds Bowser by a significant amount.
His light weight can be considered a weakness, but his light weight also means he won't stay stuck in combos or be placed for strings.
He has a massive amount of options and always has an answer to the opponents strategy which is why he does so well.

number 2 is opinion based

3) How many of MK's matchups are a 60/40 in his favor? I think we can agree that a 60/40 is not an instant loss. In theory you know your character better than the MK does, so just make sure to know equally as much about what MK can do to you. Knowledge is power and can turn a 60/40 around in your favor.

60/40 is 60/40 regardless of what occurs. You are using that knowledge and capability to make up for it not torn it around.
Best point so far.

4) How to break a game: Other characters have absolutely no options against you. You dominate the game no matter what. You beat players that are better in skill just because you use this character. The metagame revolves purely around you.
I don't think MK fits ANY of these categories. The pure fact that MK has neutral match ups goes against the first. There is solid proof of at top level play, other characters win. Top level players will **** you even if you play a decent local level MK. Don't even argue against that one. Smashboards are solid proof that the metagame does not revolve around MK.

Ninja link(diddy) vs Inui (MK)
Inui had a 2 week old MK at the time and won.
Sooo yeah.
Let alone how MK causes issues with the CP system.

5) If we ban MK do other characters become viable?
No. We will see the other top tiers and high tiers win more often instead. Banning MK will not make Jigglypuff, Sonic, or any other way down there characters viable at top level play. I don't know exactly but I can almost guarantee at least one other character in the high or top tiers take out these characters just as hard as MK or potentially harder. Every other character will just remain at that potential maybe if the best person at the tourney is using said character.

Actually Sonic fares alot better with MK gone. Thats one hard counter out of 3 and considering he is the most popular counter it really helps.
There are several other characters that would benefit because the viability of other characters would go up through countering. Something that MK restricts.

6) Even if MK is banned here, the rules the SBR create are a RECOMMENDATION.
Is every single TO out there going to ban a character that can legitimately be beaten?
Unless the TO is a complete idiot, I doubt it.

Bolded it since people do not notice it.
However if the SBR does support a ban most likely they will follow with it.
Mainly because the SBR is very well known for doingwhat is the most even minded and thought out decisions. Hence why they are so trusted.

TO's can do as they please this is true, but they'll go with the SBR since the SBR supports what they argue well.

 

[frdagaa]

My problem:

1) Everyone who says MK dominates the metagame is completely ignorant.
MK has disadvantages. Bowser and Yoshi can now play on much fairer grounds due to new strategies like grab release chains, he is a light character so killing him should not be as hard as people make it out to be. The people playing MK are human, ergo make mistakes. Punish them and get an early kill due to his light weight. Because of his dominance essentially every character has to develop anti-MK strategies. Read character boards and you will be surprised on some of the viable options.

Yes, but no. Yes, MK has weaknesses, few as they are. No, they are not easily exploited. Not even close to it. A skilled MK can play in a manner that more or less eliminates his weaknesses, something no other character has. Because of this, MK dominates the scene. You want to say he doesn't? 40%. If you don't know what I'm talking about, you're the ignorant one.

2) Matchup charts are flawed. Don't rely on them.
Just because you read a general all character matchup chart and it said MK beats Snake, don't trust this. Snake still retains field control, MK has issues dealing with grenades, really early U-tilt kills, etc
Even M2K agrees that MK has issues with top level Olimars. And let me guess, "MK ***** Olimar, his recovery sucks." Again look at the Olimar boards, he has a lot of options to solve any problem he has. Have you tried to gimp an Olimar only to have him use his whistle to go through your attack and spike you and tether back? I've done it!
Characters can do more than most of us think.

Agreed, matchup charts are not perfect. That doesn't change the fact that the only character guaranteed to go even with MK is MK himself. Other characters have certain techniques that hurt MK, but those techniques are almost all they have on him. Yoshi has his grab, but he's still even at best. This leads to the next point.

3) How many of MK's matchups are a 60/40 in his favor? I think we can agree that a 60/40 is not an instant loss. In theory you know your character better than the MK does, so just make sure to know equally as much about what MK can do to you. Knowledge is power and can turn a 60/40 around in your favor.

Wait, wait.

In theory you know your character better than the MK does?

Glorious. I'm able to beat sucky MKs. Do you know how little that proves? Are you even aware of what you're saying? "In theory," the Metaknight knows just as much about his character as I know about mine. "In theory," they're just as skilled as I am. "In theory," I lose, unless I get lucky or happen to play MK myself. That's not right, and not good for the game. Despite what AZ seems to think, Marth didn't have that - as has been said, Marth wasn't even considered the absolute best character, he was just the one of several perfectly viable characters who the best players chose to main. MK is considered the absolute best character, hands down.

4) How to break a game: Other characters have absolutely no options against you. You dominate the game no matter what. You beat players that are better in skill just because you use this character. The metagame revolves purely around you.
I don't think MK fits ANY of these categories. The pure fact that MK has neutral match ups goes against the first. There is solid proof of at top level play, other characters win. Top level players will **** you even if you play a decent local level MK. Don't even argue against that one. Smashboards are solid proof that the metagame does not revolve around MK.

Your criteria for a broken character suck. They're too absolute. You don't have to have the metagame revolve "purely" around your character. That character just has to be the overwhelming influence. Under that criteria, yes, MK is broken.

Yes, MK players beats players of higher skill level just because they use MK. Pick up ROB, try playing a MK of slightly less skill then you. Does he win? A significant amount of the time? Yes, he will. You can repeat this for not just ROB, but a solid majority of the cast. MK is the reason ROB has had diminished success over the past several months, and I'm sure this is true with other characters. You want to disagree? I reference you to Overswarm.

5) If we ban MK do other characters become viable?
No. We will see the other top tiers and high tiers win more often instead. Banning MK will not make Jigglypuff, Sonic, or any other way down there characters viable at top level play. I don't know exactly but I can almost guarantee at least one other character in the high or top tiers take out these characters just as hard as MK or potentially harder. Every other character will just remain at that potential maybe if the best person at the tourney is using said character.

Yes. ROB, who has had hugely diminished tournament success since MK became dominant, will once again become a significant force. He's in the top tier of the official tier list, but several spots down on Ankoku's list. Why? MK. MK holds down the metagame by holding back characters that can't deal with him. Maybe it won't be a huge force, but there are several decent characters with terrible matchups against MK that would benefit from the ban.

6) Even if MK is banned here, the rules the SBR create are a RECOMMENDATION.
Is every single TO out there going to ban a character that can legitimately be beaten?
Unless the TO is a complete idiot, I doubt it.

.... and? I mean, I obviously disagree with your last point, but your first two are more or less meaningless.

 

[Praxis]

My problem:

1) Everyone who says MK dominates the metagame is completely ignorant.
MK has disadvantages. Bowser and Yoshi can now play on much fairer grounds due to new strategies like grab release chains, he is a light character so killing him should not be as hard as people make it out to be. The people playing MK are human, ergo make mistakes. Punish them and get an early kill due to his light weight. Because of his dominance essentially every character has to develop anti-MK strategies. Read character boards and you will be surprised on some of the viable options.

First: Don't generalize by insulting everyone and labeling them ignorant.

Now, to rip apart your flawed post.

Bowser and Yoshi have chaingrabs on Metaknight. Yes.

Metaknight's entire moveset dominates Bowser and Yoshi in every single other aspect of the game. Speed, ground moveset, air moveset, air control, priority...these characters are utterly dominated by MK.

The grab alone is not enough to make it an advantageous or even an even matchup against them. Especially when you consider that MK is one of the hardest characters in the game to grab, and isn't disadvantaged by remaining in the air, and the grab is not a low percentage auto kill.

Until this is proven in real life- i.e., a high level bowser player or Yoshi player beating a high level MK, such as Dojo, Plank, DSF, Mew2King, or Azen- then it is nothing more than wishful thinking.

Consider the following. The best player in WA, Bladewise, mains Marth, but he switches to Bowser when facing a Metaknight and goes pretty even with Eggz. It's worth mentioning that MK is almost soft-banned in WA- only three good players use him, and then there's a ton of MK scrubs. The three good players are Jem, Eggz, and brdy- and Eggz is switching to Dedede because he doesn't like the stigma associated with maining MK in WA. Jem just goes around insulting everyone who doesn't like MK.

Now Bladewise went to Axis and fought DSF's MK with his Bowser.
He got three stocked, and DSF had no Bowser matchup knowledge.

The CG doesn't give Bowser enough of an advantage. He's still disadvantaged, just not as much as the rest of the cast.

2) Matchup charts are flawed. Don't rely on them.
Just because you read a general all character matchup chart and it said MK beats Snake, don't trust this. Snake still retains field control, MK has issues dealing with grenades, really early U-tilt kills, etc

The matchup chart IS flawed, but nobody here is relying on it. The strongest argument for MK having the advantage on Snake slightly is the fact that the best MK's are consistently beating the best Snakes.

Even M2K agrees that MK has issues with top level Olimars. And let me guess, "MK ***** Olimar, his recovery sucks." Again look at the Olimar boards, he has a lot of options to solve any problem he has. Have you tried to gimp an Olimar only to have him use his whistle to go through your attack and spike you and tether back? I've done it!
Characters can do more than most of us think.

Not enough to allow the best Olimars to actually beat MK's, once again.

3) How many of MK's matchups are a 60/40 in his favor? I think we can agree that a 60/40 is not an instant loss. In theory you know your character better than the MK does, so just make sure to know equally as much about what MK can do to you. Knowledge is power and can turn a 60/40 around in your favor.

MK's worst matchup is another MK. His next worst matchups, Snake and Diddy, are 45:55 MK's favor. He's got 60:40 on a large majority of the cast. This BREAKS the counterpicking system.

4) How to break a game: Other characters have absolutely no options against you. You dominate the game no matter what. You beat players that are better in skill just because you use this character. The metagame revolves purely around you.
I don't think MK fits ANY of these categories. The pure fact that MK has neutral match ups goes against the first. There is solid proof of at top level play, other characters win. Top level players will **** you even if you play a decent local level MK. Don't even argue against that one. Smashboards are solid proof that the metagame does not revolve around MK.

MK's worst matchup is another MK. Other character's positioning in the tier list revolves around their ability to fight them. The metagame DOES revolve around him.

5) If we ban MK do other characters become viable?
No. We will see the other top tiers and high tiers win more often instead. Banning MK will not make Jigglypuff, Sonic, or any other way down there characters viable at top level play. I don't know exactly but I can almost guarantee at least one other character in the high or top tiers take out these characters just as hard as MK or potentially harder. Every other character will just remain at that potential maybe if the best person at the tourney is using said character.

What about ROB, who does very well against most of the top tier but can't place because MK has a ridiculous matchup against him? What about Mario and Luigi, who also can't do anything in tournaments because of ridiculously bad MK matchups? What about Peach, who does well against the high tier except MK and G&W who destroy her? What about Toon Link, who does extremely well against the high tier?

MK's removal means it won't just be the few characters with decent MK matchups that place well next to him.

6) Even if MK is banned here, the rules the SBR create are a RECOMMENDATION.
Is every single TO out there going to ban a character that can legitimately be beaten?
Unless the TO is a complete idiot, I doubt it.

You're implying that the SBR are complete idiots?

 

[Praxis]

My argument to ban Metaknight has always included the idea that he was the best character in the game. Marth is considered the second best character in Melee according to the SBR tier list. He apparantly wasn't dominant enough for backroom memebers to even consider him the best. Heck, he was third or fourth best for much of the tier list. Not even close to the dominance meta has.

You can compare any two random tournaments, but that isn't a scientific comparison by any means. I could just as easily pick a tournament where the top 10 are all metas and compare it to a Melee tournament with more character variety - like when a jigglypuff won pound 3. but the fact of the matter is most people didn't even consider marth the best character, and for that alone he can't be considered with the same breath as Metaknight.

Basically, if there was a list of "what is necessary to ban a character" it would be a substantial list, but TWO of the elements would be

-Universally agreed upon as the best character

-Dominant tournament results

Metaknight falls under both but marth only falls under the second, so it is not a good comparison to make.

^^^

Thread over.

 

[frdagaa]

Honestly. The Marth comparison is an invalid one, guys. If you want to compare Metaknight to someone, compare him to Old Sagat - except Metaknight is even better.

 

[Praxis]

Honestly. The Marth comparison is an invalid one, guys. If you want to compare Metaknight to someone, compare him to Old Sagat - except Metaknight is even better.

MK = Old Sagat...except Old Sagat had two bad matchups.
MK's definitely worse, and even Sirlin agreed that a ban on O. Sagat could be fairly argued (and indeed, he was banned in Japan).

 

[cman]

MK = Old Sagat...except Old Sagat had two bad matchups.
MK's definitely worse, and even Sirlin agreed that a ban on O. Sagat could be fairly argued (and indeed, he was banned in Japan).

But only after an exceedingly mature metagame with many years of testing and results.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

The tier list "rates" Marth and Fox at the same level out of 10 (9.9) and a significant amount of top players consider him the best character in that game.

But the people who want to ban Metaknight are not saying to ban a character that a "signifcant" amount of players agree is the best, the people who ban metaknight say to ban a character who is unversally agreed upon as the best. Marth does not fall under this window, so you can be for the banning of metaknight, be against the banning of marth, and have a consistent methodology.

IMO, there are plenty of cases you can make not to ban metaknight. The fact that we didn't ban Marth is easily the worst one you can come up with because it is so clear that the two are not on comparable levels. One character is agreed to be easily the best of his game, and the other - well people always get into arguements of who is the best, marth or fox and some even make the case for Sheik, like M2K. Metaknight is agreed to be the best by EVERYONE THAT MATTERS.

There is no comparison.

 

[ShadowLink84]

I love your sig EdreesesPieces.

 

[AlphaZealot]

All I'm showing is the results, which should be the confirmation of whatever theories/practices are actually occuring.

In other words: saying "MK is the best character in the game with no bad match ups"
and saying "Marth is the second best character in the game with very few bad match ups"

Doesn't make a difference to me if both statements lead to the same conclusion.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

I'm not sure what same conclusion you are referring to, AZ. And Shadowlink: Thanks, Champ (Charoo on the boards) made it for me! =)

 

[Steel]

Marth had weaknesses, you know?

 

[DRaGZ]

Marth had very conceivable and obvious weaknesses (namely that his recovery sucked). Plus, he wasn't even the highest tiered character because his dominance was always up for debate. One could've just argued that the reason the best players were doing the best with Marth was because he gave them a better variety of options than the other characters, i.e. that at the highest level of play Marth simply was the most versatile and adaptable character.

Meta Knight has no conceivable weaknesses whatsoever and his highest tier position is absolutely indisputable by a large margin. His dominance is clear no matter what level of play you are looking at.

Like, I honestly think the top tier in Melee was pretty balanced, and I think if you took an analysis like Ankoku's thread and then applied to Melee, it would look far more balanced than the Ankoku chart for Brawl.

 

[AlphaZealot]

I'm not sure what same conclusion you are referring to, AZ. And Shadowlink: Thanks, Champ (Charoo on the boards) made it for me! =)

Basically, if there was a list of "what is necessary to ban a character" it would be a substantial list, but TWO of the elements would be

-Universally agreed upon as the best character

-Dominant tournament results

Metaknight falls under both but marth only falls under the second, so it is not a good comparison to make.

You admit both characters have dominant tournament results. That is the same conclusion, to me the premise is meaningless (or rather, highly suspect and opinionated).

 

[rehab]

I was just responding to a question about Marth.

why you gotta break stones?

 

[frdagaa]

You admit both characters have dominant tournament results. That is the same conclusion, to me the premise is meaningless (or rather, highly suspect and opinionated).

Yeah, sure you only meant to compare the dominance of the characters. You know, we can tell that you voted "no" on the MK ban. We can easily infer that by posting this thread you're trying to support MK and say he shouldn't be banned, even if it wasn't a direct statement. We're not stupid.

Our criticisms of this thread are that it is invalid against the overall comparison of the two. Yes, they do compare in one specific way; however, that one specific way is only a tiny piece of the overall puzzle as to why MK ought to be banned, and it is the only piece in which Marth is comparable to MK. Thus, this thread is meaningless to the discussion. Marth should not have been banned because he does not fit any criteria other than being the most successful character, which is one of the smallest criteria for banning MK.

 

[AlphaZealot]

It happens to be the only piece of the puzzle that matters: tournament results.

 

[ShadowLink84]

It happens to be the only piece of the puzzle that matters: tournament results.

Good now compare the EXTENT to which they dominate.
How much more does MK dominate than Marth? How much less?
How much greater?

If you factor in all the tournament results MK does that much better. National tournament wise not so much, but that is primarily due to the fact that there aren't many national tournaments to begin with, so if we base it only on national tournaments, Marth dominates just a little less than MK.

 

[frdagaa]

It happens to be the only piece of the puzzle that matters: tournament results.

No. Tournament results are not the only thing that matter: if the Brawl community dies because MK was left in the game, then leaving him in the game was a bad decision by the community. That happens to NOT be a "tournament result." In addition, such things as destroying the CP system also play against MK, and they are not purely demonstrated by tournament results.

Not to mention, as stated before: in Hobo11, MK was in how many spots? And Marth was in how many of the tournament you quoted? O, right. 5 and 2. So if you want to play like that, by tournament results: MK is more dominant.

 

[Mmac]

Bowser and Yoshi have chaingrabs on Metaknight. Yes.

Metaknight's entire moveset dominates Bowser and Yoshi in every single other aspect of the game. Speed, ground moveset, air moveset, air control, priority...these characters are utterly dominated by MK.

Maybe you should take the time to learn their movesets (At least Yoshi's before comparing them. I dunno about Bowser, but I think they already agreed it was at least 6:4 MetaKnight).

-Speed: Yoshi has excellent mobility on both on the Ground and in the Air. His general attack speed comes out very quick. He's still out classed by MetaKnight, but by only a small amount. However, he outclasses EVERYONE in Attack Speed. This is actually a plus because he can keep up with MetaKnight and even beat out some of his moves.

- Ground Moveset: Eh, not really. He's got a few things that stand out. First, his Pivot Grab out ranges AND out prioritizes EVERY move he has. No Joke. I think that's rather major problem that he's going to have an hard time getting an direct approach he has. Usmash is another one because of the Invincibility frames. It can stop his Aerial Approaches, and can stop the tornado with ease. His other moves Ftilt, Dtilt, and Jab have good range and speed.

- Air Moveset: Not as good as his Ground Moveset against him, but he still can do well here. Bair still works pretty well here, and rather hard for MetaKnight to space. Uair beats his Dair, and Yoshi's Dair beats his Shuttle Loop. He can also deal with the tornado decently with his moves in the air.

- Air Control: This isn't really a matchup where Air Control is important. If Yoshi is trying to take over the Air game, then he's doing something wrong.

- Priority: Like I said, MetaKnight has good priority, but Yoshi has moves that can easily take care of that.

MetaKnight is still solid against Yoshi, but if you think that MetaKnight completely destroys him and Yoshi has nothing except a Chaingrab, then you are greatly mistaken. He's also the only character that has Hard Stage Counterpicks against him.

The grab alone is not enough to make it an advantageous or even an even matchup against them. Especially when you consider that MK is one of the hardest characters in the game to grab, and isn't disadvantaged by remaining in the air, and the grab is not a low percentage auto kill.

You are also forgetting that Bowser has a pretty good grab, and is one of the longer reaching grabs in the game. Yoshi, not only has one of the best Range Grabs in the game, but one of the best overall grabs in the game.

Both Yoshi and Bowser can combo around 40% from their Chaingrabs, which is huge considering that Yoshi can safely kill at 110%, and Bowser for even less. Yoshi can even kill at 50% if the player using him can control his CG well enough to position a Fair Setup.

Until this is proven in real life- i.e., a high level bowser player or Yoshi player beating a high level MK, such as Dojo, Plank, DSF, Mew2King, or Azen- then it is nothing more than wishful thinking.

I recall Bwett beating Dojo a few times though... I remember him beating him in a few sets, but I don't know if he has beaten him in a tournament setting though.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Good now compare the EXTENT to which they dominate.
How much more does MK dominate than Marth? How much less?
How much greater?

Well, Marth was top 2 at 8 of the first 8 Melee 100+ person tournaments.

We already know that isn't true with MK because of Snakes early dominance.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Well, Marth was top 2 at 8 of the first 8 Melee 100+ person tournaments.

We already know that isn't true with MK because of Snakes early dominance.

The same can be said about Sheik in the early beginnings of melee.

Snake was thought to be the best and was surpassed by MK in the first 2 months and has dominated more than Snake.

Sheik dominated but then Marth surpassed her.

The issue is primarily data.