Marth in Ankoku's List for MLG Events

[otg]

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.

Alpha your point is moot. Guess what? Sheik ***** Marth. Who ***** metaknight? No one./himself.

Thread over.

 

[Steeler]

I really don't think we'll see anyone flocking to Yoshi to counter MK. Yoshi's matchup with MK is near 45/55 or worse on non-CP stages. MK's matchup with MK is 50/50, always.

I would think that having a Yoshi good enough to go near even with MK would take quite a bit of dedication. Perhaps more than simply MK himself? It's debatable, but learning a good MK would do much, much more to help a player place than learning a good Yoshi.

Yoshi has a variety of bad to neutral matchups. MK, debateably, has up to three. Using Yoshi + Good Stage could be a good CP strategy, but I think people would prefer to just MK ditto. Even with the Yoshi v MK discoveries, I've yet to see a top tournament player use Yoshi strictly to CP against MKs and place well at the same time.

 

[Mmac]

I really don't think we'll see anyone flocking to Yoshi to counter MK. Yoshi's matchup with MK is near 45/55 or worse on non-CP stages. MK's matchup with MK is 50/50, always.

I would think that having a Yoshi good enough to go near even with MK would take quite a bit of dedication. Perhaps more than simply MK himself? It's debatable, but learning a good MK would do much, much more to help a player place than learning a good Yoshi.

Yoshi has a variety of bad to neutral matchups. MK, debateably, has up to three. Using Yoshi + Good Stage could be a good CP strategy, but I think people would prefer to just MK ditto. Even with the Yoshi v MK discoveries, I've yet to see a top tournament player use Yoshi strictly to CP against MKs and place well at the same time.

Well like you said, Yoshi actually requires work an effort to actually use him. It doesn't help the fact he's one of the hardest characters to use.

It also doesn't help that he gets constantly slandered by Noobs and Pros alike, even to this day, and got a grosely bad reputation when the game was first release (People said he was even worse than Falcon, and most people still do!)

Thats probably why Yoshi Mains are so freaken rare and constantly struggling to get positive reputation.

 

[Xiivi]

Sheik ***** Marth.

More like Sheik barely beats Marth 55-45 at best.

Spoiler

waits for someone to reference phanna's chart thinking they are clever

 

[Praxis]

More like Sheik barely beats Marth 55-45 at best.

Spoiler

waits for someone to reference phanna's chart thinking they are clever

Better than anyone beats MK.

 

[GofG]

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!

This has probably already been addressed...

the only thing olimar has that can outprioritize tornado is a shield grab with a yellow pikmin, correct?

 

[Emblem Lord]

Is AZ serious?

I mean really.

What the ****?

 

[kr3wman]

AZ went down the dark path after SBIII

 

[=ArtH=]

Comparing Marth to Metaknight is just ********. I don't want Metaknight to get banned, but Marth was no where near as good as him. I have way more trouble with Sheik in Melee and Sheik still isn't even close to Metaknight status.

 

[GofG]

Let's review, AZ.
http://treefire.wetfish.net/essays/alphazealot1 - As soon as people start realizing that Brawl isn't as good as Melee, you stumble together an argument as to why Brawl is worth playing. If I may:

Brawl is fine the way it is, there is no need to find anything game changing to arise, people are merely hoping for this because that can't accept the reality that Brawl is a different game than Melee, deep and interesting in its own right.

The primary argument used by Pro-Brawlers it that it's too early to tell, that new things will be discovered. You claimed that Brawl, in its late March/early April existence where there was no reason at all to approach, didn't even need anything else to be discovered in order for it to be good.

Now that Metaknight is being softbanned in areas around the US, along with hardbanned in several countries, you throw together just as weak an argument for tolerance of MK. I do not have a strong opinion either way on banning MK. I believe he can be beaten; I believe he isn't as good as some people make him out to be. This is not my bias against Pro-MKers and Pro-Brawlers speaking.

Your arguments suck and don't even begin to prove anything. I can't remember the last time I saw a post of yours that made me think you were intelligent. Stop throwing **** together and calling it a rock-solid argument. It does nothing but hurt your stance, regardless of whether you are right or not.

Edit: Let's not forget this:

5) Online play allows much longer replay value and yet another aspect available for competitions and honing skills, even if the conditions are not ideal.

 

[Steeler]

honestly, marth/fox/sheik/maybe falco were all around the same melee level that mk now occupies by himself in brawl.

that is the difference.

imagine if sheik and fox did not exist. now you have an argument againt the mk ban, assuming marth would not have been banned.

i like your sig gofg.

 

[infernovia]

Was pikachu banned?

 

[Mmac]

Was pikachu banned?

.......... No?

 

[Dark Sonic]

Was pikachu banned?

You mean in SSB64? Weren't Kirby and Ness about as good?

 

[kr3wman]

Yes, but Isai won every tournament he entered with him. I think that's the point he's trying to make.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Comparing Marth to Metaknight is just ********. I don't want Metaknight to get banned, but Marth was no where near as good as him. I have way more trouble with Sheik in Melee and Sheik still isn't even close to Metaknight status.

People seem to be missing the point.

I don't want either character banned.

In terms of results, Marth is every bit as dominant as MK is. Thats it.

Everyone getting all upset thinking "BUT MARTH ISN'T BROKEN!", take a look at every 100+ person tournament since Brawl's release, and compare it with every 100+ tournament in Melee (there were about 32, I provided the list). Then reevaluate your stance based on RESULTS.

 

[Ulevo]

People seem to be missing the point.

I don't want either character banned.

In terms of results, Marth is every bit as dominant as MK is. Thats it.

Everyone getting all upset thinking "BUT MARTH ISN'T BROKEN!", take a look at every 100+ person tournament since Brawl's release, and compare it with every 100+ tournament in Melee (there were about 32, I provided the list). Then reevaluate your stance based on RESULTS.

AZ is correct, and no one is paying attention to his point.

Meta Knight is very dominant in the game right now, but rather than people arguing specifics of his character, and using that as a means to justify his ban, some people are arguing that HE IS WINNING TOO MUCH, and that because of this he should be banned. AZ is using Marths competitive results, and comparing them to Meta Knights as of right now. Marth was actually more dominant in tournament results compared to other characters than our current Meta Knight. He isn't arguing Marth is broken, or that Meta Knight is broken, or that he wants either of them banned. He is giving you FACTUAL STATISTICS that show that the two of them are very similar when it comes to tournament results. The bottom line is, if you're going to ***** about how much Meta Knight is winning, you can't leave facts like this ignored, because no one was claiming Marth needed to be banned back in Melee strickly because of how much he was winning to my understanding.

Start paying attention.

EDIT: Oh, and if anyone argues that "well, in Melee, we still had [insert other top/high tier characters here]". That ISN'T the point. In the end, it doesn't matter how good or bad Meta Knight is, it matters by how much he is taking over. Whether or not he has other characters capable of competing him is irrelevant if the tournament results do not reflect that, because if Meta Knight didn't have three times as many wins as Snake, the whole community wouldn't be *****ing about him.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

THIS IS JUST A HISTORY LESSON! MAKE YOUR OWN JUDGMENTS!

2007 top 25 tournaments: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=143600
-11 of the 25 tournaments listed were won by Marth
-15 of the 25 tournaments had Marth in the top 3 (or even twice in the top 3)
-Of the 5 tournaments with at least 200 attendants, Marth won 3 and placed 2nd in the other 2


2006 MLG events:
-Of the 6 Regular season (open) events in 2006 for MLG, Marth won 5 of them (minimum attendence 143, maximum attendance 204, rough average attendance about 165)
-Marth was on the winning team for EVERY single event.

---

It is far more interesting to look at the number/variety of characters used in the top 8 then simply to look at who won, because usually the same names will appear frequently and the best players are simply the best players.

For example, HOBO 11 is often used as evidence that MK should be banned, but look at the results again:
1: M2K (meta)
2: Azen (lucario/meta)
3: Lee (meta)
4: DMG (wario
5: DSF (snake/meta)
5: Roy_R (marth)
7: Edrees (peach)
7: Hylian (GW/meta?)

There are 7 characters represented in the top 8.

Lets compare to VLS, the last major Melee tournament in 2007:

1. Azen (Marth)
2. ChuDat (Ice Climbers)
3. KoreanDJ (Sheik)
4. Mew2King (Marth)
5. Drephen (Sheik)
5. PC Chris (Fox/Falco?)
7. Chillin (Fox)
7. Darc (Jigglypuff)
(if any of these players used other characters in top 8 matches please inform me)
That is 6 characters represented in the top 8, maybe less if PC didn't use Falco (need confirmation).
So, should you look at just who won, or should you look at the big picture and the number of characters used in top 8 matches? Marth won the vast majority of 100+ person tournaments over Melee's life time:
In 2004, there were 2 100 person tournaments: Marth won TG6 (cali) ang GO (Virginia)
In 2005, there were 6 100 person tournaments: FC3 (Marth), GS2 (Marth), MLG DC (Marth, MLG San Francisco (need to confirm but I believe Marth), BOMB 4 (IC, but Marth took 2nd/3rd), MOAST 3 (Falcon, Marth second, correct if wrong but IIRC Isai won over Ken)
In 2006, there were 12 100+ person tournaments: (MLG New York (Opener)-Falco 1st, Marth 2nd, MLG Dallas-Marth 1st, MLG Anaheim-Marth 1st, MLG Chicago-Marth 1st, MLG Orlando-Marth 1st, MLG New York (Playoffs)-Marth 1st, FC6-Falco 1st, OC2-Marth 1st, SMYM 6-???, Gauntlet-???)

Marth was in the top 2 or won almost every single 100+ Melee tournament.
Between 2004 and 2005, of the 8 100+ person tournaments, Marth was top 2 in ALL of them, or all but one (need confirmation on MLG San Fransisco). Marth had a 62.5% win rate at 100+ tournaments between 2004/2005 and a 100% or 87.5% top 2 rate.
At least 8 of the 12 100 person tournaments in 2006 had Marth in the top 2, with no data for 2 tournaments (so through those out and make it 8 of the 10 tournaments, until someone says the winners), and Marth won almost every single MLG event (so when the money was on the line, Marth performed), there wasn't a single MLG event that there wasn't any Marths in the top 3.

-
TL:DR version: Marth placed in the top 3 at almost EVERY SINGLE 100+ person Melee tournament, EVER. Of the approximately 30 100+ person tournaments between 2004 and 2007, Marth was in the top 2 at over 20 of the tournaments. In the earliest year that Melee had a national scene, in 2004, Marth won 100% of 100+ person tournaments. Including 2005, Marth win's % barely drops slightly (still won more than 50% of the 100+ person tournaments), but he is top 2 at 100% of tournaments (out of 8 100+ person tournaments between 2004 and 2005).

---

Basically, Marth dominated from day 1 in Melee, and his dominance didn't ever wane. You can say all you want about match ups, I'm just looking at the RESULTS.

I don't know Melee very well, but weren't there other great characters too, like Fox and Sheik? The MK situation is different, he is on a whole different level, to the point where the only way people are CP'ing him against himself, and he is on of the easiest characters to pick up, whereas I believe Marth was harder to pick up. Just my opinion, and Melee is different from Brawl...

 

[ice-]

Even if mk has not bad matchups (I am not saying he does), why should he be banned?

There are so many characters from other 2D fighting games that have no bad match ups but are still legal. Brawl is all about controlling space and knowing match ups, I really don't think mk is bannable.

But if you just want to ban mk b/c he isn't any fun to play against, that is an entirely different argument.

 

[kr3wman]

People didn't want to ban Marth because they knew and still know that the players were better than them. Same thing with Isai's pikachu.

It's not the same thing with MK. I'm not saying people that use MK are bad, it's that MK offset the require amount of skills needed to win those tournaments compared to other characters in the game.

 

[Praxis]

Even if mk has not bad matchups (I am not saying he does), why should he be banned?

There are so many characters from other 2D fighting games that have no bad match ups but are still legal. Brawl is all about controlling space and knowing match ups, I really don't think mk is bannable.

Name some.

 

[UnSaxon51]

I don't think AZ's tournament argument works.

Yet.

I wasn't familiar with the smash community until about a year ago, but if I recall, Sheik was lauded as the unbelievably over-powered, nigh-unbeatable character in Melee for quite a while. It wasn't until players learned to beat her (and discovered new techniques with other characters) that this began to change. Heck, Marth wasn't even considered for top tier until 2006, SIX YEARS after Melee was released.

In other words, there just hasn't been enough time to A) properly compare Meta Knight to anyone in Melee, or B) to legitimately consider banning him. Once we reach a point where the competitive metagame has had time to adapt and grow, then it might be time to take a swing with the ban-stick.

I really don't want to see Meta Knight banned, but I acknowledge the possibility that it might be necessary.
Just not yet.

 

[Ulevo]

People didn't want to ban Marth because they knew and still know that the players were better than them. Same thing with Isai's pikachu.

It's not the same thing with MK. I'm not saying people that use MK are bad, it's that MK offset the require amount of skills needed to win those tournaments compared to other characters in the game.

Bulls ****.

How easy a character is to play is not a reflection of their character potential. Melee Fox or Brawl Ice Climbers are a perfect example of that.

If you're fighting scrub Meta Knights, and you're losing, it's because you're a bad player. And we are not deciding a ban for Meta Knight based on your poor track record or skill. We're basing it off of high level play. And guess what? You know all those wins Meta Knight has in Ankokus thread? Do you think they're made by bad players? Last time I checked, players like M2K, Forte, Azen, Dojo, KingAce, et cetera... were all good players.

Please... please... Do not argue the "he's easy to use" shpeal. It really doesn't hold any ground whatsoever. Where the hell is Yuna?

 

[BentoBox]

AZ is correct, and no one is paying attention to his point.

Meta Knight is very dominant in the game right now, but rather than people arguing specifics of his character, and using that as a means to justify his ban, some people are arguing that HE IS WINNING TOO MUCH, and that because of this he should be banned. AZ is using Marths competitive results, and comparing them to Meta Knights as of right now. Marth was actually more dominant in tournament results compared to other characters than our current Meta Knight. He isn't arguing Marth is broken, or that Meta Knight is broken, or that he wants either of them banned. He is giving you FACTUAL STATISTICS that show that the two of them are very similar when it comes to tournament results. The bottom line is, if you're going to ***** about how much Meta Knight is winning, you can't leave facts like this ignored, because no one was claiming Marth needed to be banned back in Melee strickly because of how much he was winning to my understanding.

Start paying attention.

EDIT: Oh, and if anyone argues that "well, in Melee, we still had [insert other top/high tier characters here]". That ISN'T the point. In the end, it doesn't matter how good or bad Meta Knight is, it matters by how much he is taking over. Whether or not he has other characters capable of competing him is irrelevant if the tournament results do not reflect that, because if Meta Knight didn't have three times as many wins as Snake, the whole community wouldn't be *****ing about him.

How about paying more attention to the actual context rather than pushing forth the comparison of two games with totally different metagames as emperically sound proof?

Marth did dominate and he wasn't even the best character in the game, explain and relate this to MK's situation in any way possible.

 

[=ArtH=]

People seem to be missing the point.

I don't want either character banned.

In terms of results, Marth is every bit as dominant as MK is. Thats it.

Everyone getting all upset thinking "BUT MARTH ISN'T BROKEN!", take a look at every 100+ person tournament since Brawl's release, and compare it with every 100+ tournament in Melee (there were about 32, I provided the list). Then reevaluate your stance based on RESULTS.

What I meant was I had trouble with Sheik but it was nothing compared to how ridiculous Metaknight can be. Marth did so good because he countered most of the meta(hurr) during that time, Metaknight does so good because he's just plain better than everyone. I know I'm making it sound like I'm on the "Metaknight should be banned side," but I'm not. I know people will eventually find ways to just **** him (grabs don't count), that's why I don't want to resort to a ban. Oh and the first and second place Marths were mostly Ken/M2K, I don't know if that says anything.

 

[ice-]

Name some.

Eddie from GG
Yun from 3S
Saget from SF4
to name a few

 

[Ulevo]

How about paying more attention to the actual context rather than pushing forth the comparison of two games with totally different metagames as emperically sound proof?

Marth did dominate and he wasn't even the best character in the game, explain and relate this to MK's situation in any way possible.

Why would I need to?

There are members that specifically use Meta Knights tournament results as excuses to why he should be given the ban hammer, when the reality is that he simply isn't as overwhelming in tournament results as people claim. My posts (ones quoted) are directed towards those individuals. Using Marths dominant streak in Melee, regardless of what the metagame was like in Melee, is only meant to enforce that argument by displaying that tournament results similar to Meta Knights were in no need of a ban during any stage of that particular games lifetime. It doesn't matter what game you play... If the character/strategy/item/weapon/et cetera is overused to complete centralization, it will be banned. Marth was not. Why should Meta Knight?

 

[kr3wman]

Bulls ****.

How easy a character is to play is not a reflection of their character potential. Melee Fox or Brawl Ice Climbers are a perfect example of that.

If you're fighting scrub Meta Knights, and you're losing, it's because you're a bad player. And we are not deciding a ban for Meta Knight based on your poor track record or skill. We're basing it off of high level play. And guess what? You know all those wins Meta Knight has in Ankokus thread? Do you think they're made by bad players? Last time I checked, players like M2K, Forte, Azen, Dojo, KingAce, et cetera... were all good players.

Please... please... Do not argue the "he's easy to use" shpeal. It really doesn't hold any ground whatsoever. Where the hell is Yuna?

I saw very good players counterpick Meta Knight because they didn't want to go through the trouble of fighting a player better then them at a certain matchup.

The argument is not ''MK should be banned because he's easy to use and win with'' it's ''He's easy to use as a answer to all your problems in the game''. As people use MK for certain matchup more and more, they'll become better with MK that their main. And most people, because they want to win those tournaments, will decide that they're better off with MK than their old main. And it's not with Mario, Ness or Sheik or anything. I've seen people drop Marth, Falco and ROB to use MK because they knew they had a better chance of winning.

The fact that's he's easy to use is not and never was the problem. He's easy to win with.

 

[Moosetracks]

Your arguments suck and don't even begin to prove anything. I can't remember the last time I saw a post of yours that made me think you were intelligent. Stop throwing **** together and calling it a rock-solid argument. It does nothing but hurt your stance, regardless of whether you are right or not.

I don't think he's arguing; he's rather telling his opinion. Let's put it this way. Brawl does not "suck". You just don't like it. Maybe it "sucks" in your life but in some of ours it doesn't. No matter how much more you know about Smash this still stands.... I personally think an argument to tell someone that their "argument" sucks is rather pointless.... Now if you guys understand what I'm saying, we can move on.

If you want to know what I think about brawl, it's a new game thus requires you to learn how to play differently. Name one game you play online where the first time you played it you compete with the others well. You might have even played this games offline for a while and yet, when you go online, the element of game play differs drastically.... Just learn how to play it and if people call you a "noob" or whatever just get over it and don't let it hurt you. You don't have to take what they say about you and most likely it's bringing you down if you do. Either that, or go back to Melee and let us play Brawl....

 

[BentoBox]

Why would I need to?

There are members that specifically use Meta Knights tournament results as excuses to why he should be given the ban hammer, when the reality is that he simply isn't as overwhelming in tournament results as people claim. My posts (ones quoted) are directed towards those individuals. Using Marths dominant streak in Melee, regardless of what the metagame was like in Melee, is only meant to enforce that argument by displaying that tournament results similar to Meta Knights were in no need of a ban during any stage of that particular games lifetime. It doesn't matter what game you play... If the character/strategy/item/weapon/et cetera is overused to complete centralization, it will be banned. Marth was not. Why should Meta Knight?

How are you helping your case when you admit to wasting your time on arguments void of objectivity. It doesn't really help when you take an argument and isolate it and then pick its flaws. MK is dominant as a result of his overpowering characteristics. In that aspect too, Marth did not compare in any way. The physics of the game allowed Marth to be punished and gimped with more ease (disregarding the tech skill required), the amount of options (and variables) at every player's reach made it strictly a matter of skill as to how a Marth player would dominate another. Brawl in itself is much more linear of a game and you -cannot- disregard this fact. We do not have the same amount of tools at our disposition to deal with certain types of approaches (ie. nado), defensive maneuvers (ie. ledge camping), etc, hence why, again, MK (brawl) does not compare to Marth (melee). Again, why did Marth dominate when Sheik and Fox were considered better characters? Ease of use might be an explanation, but as that is generally disregarded, it must come down to taste. You actually had the option to choose any of 4 characters (+ a few others), bring out their full potential and compete. In Brawl, you would go for anything other than MK because of taste or stubborness. Not because MK is as much of an option as the rest of the top tiers. Counterpicks, etc.

Etc.

 

[Mmac]

Eddie from GG
Yun from 3S
Saget from SF4

- Isn't Guilty Gear one of the most Balanced Fighting games out there, where pretty much every character is viable?
- Ken, Chun Li, Makoto, and Dudley do just as well on the tournament scene, and Ken is proved to be even with Yun. Plus Chun Li devastates everyone else even moreso than Yun. Yun is not dominating in the same matter as MetaKnight.
- Strange... I heard Zangeif > Saget in SFIV....

 

[kr3wman]

Sagat is considered the best character in SF4 with a three-way tie between Ryu, Bison (Dictator) and Zangief for second.

 

[Crizthakidd]

lolol omgg those matches between inui and AZ were sick. he got sooo much better with MK dammm i remember he picked him up just 2 weeks ago and then won or got second at a few local tournies. looks like he knows the diddy matchup too. but if u ask him he dropped marths *** for mk and his chances and placing havve gone through the roof.

at like 40+ pple tournies if ur mk u CAN win the tourny if your not, .. well you dont. there is some hope in the form of snake.

 

[Mmac]

Sagat is considered the best character in SF4 with a three-way tie between Ryu, Bison (Dictator) and Zangief for second.

The only problem is that SFIV JUST came out! I don't even think it's a Month old yet. It's still far too early for an accurate Tier list, and if there's about 4 people considered the best, then it's probably going to not be in the same boat as Brawl.

I doubt Sagat (Or Zangeif, alot of people are saying he's the best...) will be banned.

 

[Overswarm]

Didn't need to post a thing. You guys make me so proud. *sniff*

 

[kr3wman]

The only problem is that SFIV JUST came out! I don't even think it's a Month old yet. It's still far too early for an accurate Tier list, and if there's about 4 people considered the best, then it's probably going to not be in the same boat as Brawl.

I doubt Sagat (Or Zangeif, alot of people are saying he's the best...) will be banned.

Of course not.

SFIV has enough depth to have a character with no bad matchups and have no problem with it.

Brawl doesn't.

 

[Praxis]

lolol omgg those matches between inui and AZ were sick. he got sooo much better with MK dammm i remember he picked him up just 2 weeks ago and then won or got second at a few local tournies. looks like he knows the diddy matchup too. but if u ask him he dropped marths *** for mk and his chances and placing havve gone through the roof.

at like 40+ pple tournies if ur mk u CAN win the tourny if your not, .. well you dont. there is some hope in the form of snake.

Inui...picked up MK two weeks before that fight with AZ?

Considering how much AZ *breathes* the MK matchup (see his "MK Challenge" in which he decimates MK scrubs over WiFi on AiB), and how rare Diddy's are so AZ likely had much better matchup knowledge...that really says something.

 

[unwelc0med]

only because of ken.

 

[clowsui]

AZ got nervous.

He hasn't played in a single tourney final since 2005.

2005!

 

[rehab]

Inui supposedly knew the Diddy match.