Marth in Ankoku's List for MLG Events

[SwastikaPyle]

Anyone who doesn't use MK is a scrub. Anyone who doesn't plank their way through a match is also a scrub, since it is the most effective way of winning.

10sirlins

 

[M15t3R E]

I grow tired of this tedious quoting when I know you aren't going to adopt the opinions the majority of smashers now hold anyway.

I'll answer in an organized several paragraphs.

You say that just because counter-picking is fundamental to the game doesn't mean we need to counter-pick against Meta Knight. And you say that is your whole point. Yuna, you are missing MY whole point. The problem is precisely that you needn't counter-pick against Meta Knight as it won't help you. He has no clear match-ups that are close to even. So, we don't need to counter-pick but we CAN counter-pick wisely against any other character. Meta Knight is the flaw that breaks this fundamental (your word) part of the game.

Meta Knight IS amazing against every character on the roster. Even more amazing against some characters than others. He has a 60/40 match-up or better against every other character- usually better. That is called dominating since he's able to attain such advantageous match-ups across the entire roster.

I brought up creator intent not for you to analyze why I brought it up, but to imply that the developers inadvertently programmed Meta Knight to be a character who is extremely hard to match in any sort of combat.

You asked me why everyone doesn't just jump onboard the Meta Knight bandwagon. I answered by saying a large number of smashers have always wanted to use their mains from Melee in Brawl and that is one of the many reasons why not everyone uses Meta Knight. Personally, I recognize that Meta Knight is better than my character and that if I used him I'd be more tournament-viable. Still, enough people use Meta Knight as no character has even a third of his win percentage. Another point was that many smashers actually care about respect, and they know they aren't deserving of respect in the eyes of most other smashers if they use Meta Knight. Your point was true, that some don't care about respect and honor and that winning is all that is on their mind.

"What happened to "People are flocking to Meta Knight, abandoning their mains! Meta Knight is winning so many tournaments! It's so easy to play as him and win!"
What's with this random BS talking out of your behind about people all of a sudden having honor and sticking with their original characters instead of jumping ship when a part of your argument is that they aren't?!"
Many would never use Meta Knight just to win, and others will use Meta Knight just for wins. Both points are true. Not everyone is flocking to Meta Knight but many are. What about that do you not understand?

Again, your request for a list is silly. M2K of the EC and DSF of the WC have vastly more wins under their belts than anyone in their respective regions and they both use Meta Knight.

Banning all of the top tier characters is ridiculous because of what I have previously stated. They can all be, with the exception of Meta Knight, easily counter-picked and easily exploited for their weaknesses.

With many of Meta Knight's attacks you talk about DI helping tremendously. That right there is incorrect. It does not help much, if at all. *sigh* You STILL don't understand the point that the pro-ban side has made very clear. Get this into your head: It doesn't matter if you can DI out of Meta Knight's attacks. A good Meta Knight will still not get punished for you being able to DI out of the attacks, and then you're back to square one with no reliable way to land hits on Meta Knight.
To put it as succinctly as possible: Even if you can DI out of the attacks well, a good Meta Knight does not get punished for it and you won't be able to retaliate at all.

Maybe you don't understand English. Good day.

 

[Chum]

If you really feel the need for meta-knight to be banned, host a tournament with him banned.. However don't argue and say why he should be banned, prove why he should be banned. Gather physical evidence by hosting tournaments with meta-knight and without him, because honestly it doesn't matter what your opinion is on the matter, because unless you host a tournament or get someone to do it for you, nothing will change at all. I for one as a TO will not ban meta-knight. I feel it is unneeded but thats my own personal feeling.

 

[M15t3R E]

If you really feel the need for meta-knight to be banned, host a tournament with him banned.. However don't argue and say why he should be banned, prove why he should be banned. Gather physical evidence by hosting tournaments with meta-knight and without him, because honestly it doesn't matter what your opinion is on the matter, because unless you host a tournament or get someone to do it for you, nothing will change at all. I for one as a TO will not ban meta-knight. I feel it is unneeded but thats my own personal feeling.

One can never "prove" why Meta Knight should be banned.
Did you or Yuna listen to the podcast last night? If so, I hope you were as open-minded as I was.
Both sides made compelling arguments but all the evidence you'd need to give Meta Knight the boot was presented clearly.

BTW, do you think I am arguing with myself here? Yuna doesn't need to stop arguing too? Frankly, I grow weary of this bickering and I'd like to go Brawl now. Would do Melee but my buddy Tope is at work, so yeah...

 

[brinboy789]

If you really feel the need for meta-knight to be banned, host a tournament with him banned.. However don't argue and say why he should be banned, prove why he should be banned. Gather physical evidence by hosting tournaments with meta-knight and without him, because honestly it doesn't matter what your opinion is on the matter, because unless you host a tournament or get someone to do it for you, nothing will change at all. I for one as a TO will not ban meta-knight. I feel it is unneeded but thats my own personal feeling.

hobo12 is mk ban to see tourney results

 

[Yuna]

I grow tired of this tedious quoting when I know you aren't going to adopt the opinions the majority of smashers now hold anyway.

Why must I conform and adopt the opinions of the majority? Just because it's the majority doesn't mean it's automatically right.

I've said it many times, IMO:
1) It's too early.
2) At the level Meta Knight is at this very moment, he should not be banned (in other words, if he stays the same once "It's too early" becomes moot, IMO, he should still not be banned.
(3) If he gets better, then I'll move for a ban)

You say that just because counter-picking is fundamental to the game doesn't mean we need to counter-pick against Meta Knight.

No, I'm saying that counter-picking is a fundamental part of the metagame we have created, not a fundamental necessity to play Smash or Brawl.

And you say that is your whole point. Yuna, you are missing MY whole point. The problem is precisely that you needn't counter-pick against Meta Knight as it won't help you. He has no clear match-ups that are close to even.

I'm sorry, what? Your entirely argument just failed here. Even the most ardent ban-nowers (who are credible, anyway) admit that there are matchups where it's "close to even" (60:40 is close to even, Snake's 55:45 is actually even by most (credible) people's standards).

So, we don't need to counter-pick but we CAN counter-pick wisely against any other character. Meta Knight is the flaw that breaks this fundamental (your word) part of the game.

I didn't say it was fundamental. I was arguing against your claim that it was a fundamental (though you used a different word) of the game. Stop strawmanning, rewriting and randomly BS:ing your way through this debate.

What I said is that counterpicking isn't a necessity to play Smash. We've just made it such a big part of our metagame.

Meta Knight IS amazing against every character on the roster.

Yeah, I guess 55:45 and 60:40 is "amazing". Again you disqualify yourself from this debate.

Even more amazing against some characters than others. He has a 60/40 match-up or better against every other character- usually better.

55:45 against Snake. 60/40 =/= Amazing. 55:45 is even. 60:40 is, therefore, just a disadvantageous matchup, barely so.

That is called dominating since he's able to attain such advantageous match-ups across the entire roster.

Not really, not if there's one 55:45 and a few 60:40s. That's not dominating at all. Those characters all stand good chances of beating him.

I brought up creator intent not for you to analyze why I brought it up, but to imply that the developers inadvertently programmed Meta Knight to be a character who is extremely hard to match in any sort of combat.

And again I ask (for the, what, third time): Why would it matter? Why would it matter if the programmers actually did it? The only thing that matters is whether or not Meta Knight is "too good" (or as some argue, "Too detrimental to the community").

You asked me why everyone doesn't just jump onboard the Meta Knight bandwagon.

No, no, oh, master of Strawmanning and Revisionist History. I asked, and I quote:
How come it's only 30% (and it's more than that, I believe)? How come it's not 50% 75% 90%? If it's so unfairly difficult to beat him, why is it happening so much?

Also, name 10 Meta Knights who have taken 1st at a quasi-large to large tourney skillwise (as in tourneys with good players in attendance). Count the number of tournies M2K, Dojo and Forte or whoever have won and remove them from the equation and see how many are left.

Since MK is so unfairly good, tons of other players should be winning as him, right?

Nowhere in there was there a question of why everyone doesn't just jump on board the MK bandwagon.

It's like you think you can hypnotize me into forgetting what I actually wrote.

I answered by saying a large number of smashers have always wanted to use their mains from Melee in Brawl and that is one of the many reasons why not everyone uses Meta Knight.

You answered with baloney that had nothing to do with my question. Now answer my question for once.

Personally, I recognize that Meta Knight is better than my character and that if I used him I'd be more tournament-viable. Still, enough people use Meta Knight as no character has even a third of his win percentage.

Wait... what? Also, again, name these, apparently, bountiful MK players who win as him.

Another point was that many smashers actually care about respect, and they know they aren't deserving of respect in the eyes of most other smashers if they use Meta Knight. Your point was true, that some don't care about respect and honor and that winning is all that is on their mind.

Respect and honor in Competitive gaming is meaningless. Half of the stuff that goes on at tourney is "cheap". Chaingrabbing, locking, counterpicking, comboing, edgeguarding, gimping. If we wanted manly respectful and honorful matches, we'd all be playing, oh, I don't know, Ganondorf.

Many would never use Meta Knight just to win, and others will use Meta Knight just for wins. Both points are true. Not everyone is flocking to Meta Knight but many are. What about that do you not understand?

Whatever. The question, again, is not whether or not people are flocking to MK, it's whether or not MK is actually dominating. With so many people flocking to MK, with MK apparently "dominating" the metagame and winning with ease, how come it's only 30%? How come it's not more?

Again, your request for a list is silly. M2K of the EC and DSF of the WC have vastly more wins under their belts than anyone in their respective regions and they both use Meta Knight.

Ummm... yes, and? Maybe because they are two of the very best Smashers in the world? If MK is so overpowered, easy to pick up, easy to win as and dominating and with, apparently, so many players jumping ship to MK, he should be winning many more tournaments. And many more MKs other than those two should be winning them!

And DSF either uses MK as a secondary or he just recently switched to MK. For a while there, he used Snake, so poo poo on you.

Banning all of the top tier characters is ridiculous because of what I have previously stated. They can all be, with the exception of Meta Knight, easily counter-picked and easily exploited for their weaknesses.

Reading comprehension, please. The point is that if we want to maximize "fun" and "competition", banning them would accomplish that as we'd gain tons of viable characters. It was to invalidate the statement that the rules are written to maximize "fun" and "competition".

With many of Meta Knight's attacks you talk about DI helping tremendously.

I said that DI will make several of his attacks not even half as good as some people seem to think they are, more specifically moves like the Mach Tornado, which so many people seem to think is some kind of godly weapon.

That right there is incorrect.

Only because you rewrote what I said (strawmanning) in your head so that you could "refute" it.

It does not help much, if at all. *sigh* You STILL don't understand the point that the pro-ban side has made very clear. Get this into your head: It doesn't matter if you can DI out of Meta Knight's attacks.

It does help. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.

This wasn't evenA good Meta Knight will still not get punished for you being able to DI out of the attacks, and then you're back to square one with no reliable way to land hits on Meta Knight.

I'm sorry, again I ask, where do I say that DI:ing out of Meta Knights attacks makes it easy to punish him or that the main purpose of DI:ing out of them is for punishing him?! I specifically said, over and over and over again, that the main purpose was to simply get out of the natural combos.

God, your strawmanning and inability to comprehend plain English seemingly knows no bounds!

To put it as succinctly as possible: Even if you can DI out of the attacks well, a good Meta Knight does not get punished for it and you won't be able to retaliate at all.

It's quite easy for you to refute people's points when you make them up in your head. Stop claiming I said things I didn't say. It makes you a liar, a strawmanner and just an altogether very bad debater.

Maybe you don't understand English. Good day.

Do you really want me to compile a list of your crimes against the English langauge? Because I can. I could just quote myself and then quote your interpretation and then we'll leave it up to the others to judge how well you comprehend plain English.

Don't reply to me if all you're going to do is more strawmanning.

One can never "prove" why Meta Knight should be banned.

Pray tell, why not?

I did not listen to the podcast since "Night" in the U.S. means "middle of the night" in Sweden and I had university today.

 

[M15t3R E]

First off, "crimes against the English language" would mean poor grammar, lack of punctuation, horrendous spelling issues, etc. Reading comprehension trouble doesn't equate to such "crimes". So you can end that personal insult now. Thanks.
By the way, I let you slide many times but because you are so concerned with proper English I must inform you that it is written "DI'ing", not "DI:ing". You use an apostrophe after the abbreviation of Directional Influence to indicate you are referring to the transitive conjugation of the word.

Not really. It's a fundamental part of the game. They each have characters (I don't know about DoA since I don't play DoA or bother with it) that require no secondaries or other mains are counterpicks, really. If you can master Xianghua in Soul Calibur II and III, you're set against pretty much everyone. So if we're gonna argue SC, then Meta Knight shouldn't be banned.

While counterpicking is a part of these game (and I've never denied that), it's not some kind of fundamental part of the games, an element without which the games cannot survive Competitively. Just because you can counterpick doesn't mean you must, which is my whole argument.

You did say counter-picking is a fundamental part of the game. Yes, it is because we made it that way. Yes, it isn't completely necessary. Since it can sometimes make all the difference, that is why it is a fundamental part of the game.

Not really, not if there's one 55:45 and a few 60:40s. That's not dominating at all. Those characters all stand good chances of beating him.

Yes, it is dominating because no one has the edge over him. As long as that's the case, it is called dominating.

Wait... what? Also, again, name these, apparently, bountiful MK players who win as him.

Are you dense? Does the fact that Meta Knight, one of 35-38 characters (however you want to look at it) alone has won almost 30% of tournaments nationwide. That statistic alone proves the Meta Knight players ARE bountiful.

Okay, the main point in all of this is that YOU DO NOT EXPLAIN HOW TO FIGHT META KNIGHT!
DI can only help you defensively, and barely even so. How do you actually attack Meta Knight? I've been trying to get you to answer that forever and you seem to shy away from that question every time.

 

[Yuna]

First off, "crimes against the English language" would mean poor grammar, lack of punctuation, horrendous spelling issues, etc. Reading comprehension trouble doesn't equate to such "crimes". So you can end that personal insult now. Thanks.

No, reading comprehension is a part of it too, I'm sure. Ask any teacher and see if they'll pass you if you're unable to understand even the simplest of texts even if your writing is flawless.

You did say counter-picking is a fundamental part of the game. Yes, it is because we made it that way. Yes, it isn't completely necessary. Since it can sometimes make all the difference, that is why it is a fundamental part of the game.

I didn't say it was a fundamental part of the game. How many times must I tell you this? I said we made it a fundamental part of our metagame. The game's programming didn't change because of us.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fundamental

"Sometimes makes all the difference" =/= Fundamental.

Yes, it is dominating because no one has the edge over him. As long as that's the case, it is called dominating.

No, it's not. He's just above the rest. That's not dominating. That's just being "the best". One can easily be "the best" without dominating. Simply having no bad matchups =/= Dominating.

 

[M15t3R E]

No, reading comprehension is a part of it too, I'm sure. Ask any teacher and see if they'll pass you if you're unable to understand even the simplest of texts even if your writing is flawless.

"Crimes against the English language" is another example of your hyperboles. The teacher might not pass you, but not because of such "crimes". Therefore, stop flaming. Thanks.

I didn't say it was a fundamental part of the game. How many times must I tell you this? I said we made it a fundamental part of our metagame. The game's programming didn't change because of us.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fundamental

"Sometimes makes all the difference" =/= Fundamental.

Fundamental part of the game, fundamental part of our metagame... what difference does it make?
It's fundamental. There you go.

No, it's not. He's just above the rest. That's not dominating. That's just being "the best". One can easily be "the best" without dominating. Simply having no bad matchups =/= Dominating.

"The best" character is broken if he doesn't have any true counters. Fox was the best in Melee and Marths seemed to keep up with Fox quite well. Heck, every one of the top and high tier characters did.


Time and time again you miss the biggest point. At this point I'm not sure if you'll ever answer. The fact is that Meta Knight out-prioritizes and out-ranges everyone.
So even if you are the best smasher at DI'ing in the world, it doesn't give a good indication of your chances of victory against Meta Knight.

 

[brinboy789]

"Crimes against the English language" is another example of your hyperboles. The teacher might not pass you, but not because of such "crimes".



Fundamental part of the game, fundamental part of our metagame... what difference does it make?
It's fundamental. There you go.

"The best" character is broken if he doesn't have any true counters. Fox was the best in Melee and Marths seemed to keep up with Fox quite well.

actually if you check the new melee tier list, martb and fox are both first. tied for first.

 

[M15t3R E]

actually if you check the new melee tier list, martb and fox are both first. tied for first.

Actually, if you check a variety of Melee videos you'd see that any of the top and high tier Melee characters were able to keep up with one another at the same level.

EDIT: After making this point (above), I have come to the realization that if Brawl didn't suck we wouldn't have to be bickering like this. >_>

 

[Chum]

hobo12 is mk ban to see tourney results

Thats good, I was unaware of that, thank you for bringing that up. In all honesty though, several trials need to be done for a experiment to be successfull. Also, all those tournaments should be compiled along side with other tournaments were meta-knight is banned. That would help the anti-meta-knight side of the story.

 

[M15t3R E]

I too am looking forward to viewing those hobo12 results.
One of the top tier characters will win it, most likely. In any case, at least it's not like there's a highly likely chance that one particular character of the top tiers will win. In MK-allowed tourneys, it's most likely Meta Knight to be the winner each time.
The results of No MK tourneys will be more diverse because without Meta Knight, who will win it can be far more unpredictable. That being said, I firmly believe that bodes well for Brawl as a competitive fighter.

 

[unwelc0med]

if not mk, then snake


but that's fine with me! (points to main)

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

Thats good, I was unaware of that, thank you for bringing that up. In all honesty though, several trials need to be done for a experiment to be successfull. Also, all those tournaments should be compiled along side with other tournaments were meta-knight is banned. That would help the anti-meta-knight side of the story.

You would need 6 months to actually compare them and I don't even think they will be accurate because a MK less metagame would be much different IMO.

 

[dainbramage]

You don't understand the idea of the same role. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Peach and Marth both have an advantage against Falco and have a similarly sized advantage. Let's further say that it's because Peach can use her floating to really limit Falco's offense while Marth's grab game is especially devastating to Falco (I don't care if any of this is true or not so don't bother commenting on it). Now, you can say "Marth and Peach are totally different!" all you want, but as far as Falco is concerned, they are the same. The matches will LOOK a lot different, but the result (Falco is at a disadvantage of magnitude N) is the exact same. If this process repeats against all significant characters, they will occupy the same role in the metagame regardless of how different their playstyles are.

Matchup wise, these proposed new characters aren't able to accomplish what Marth is at all. They would have no impact at all on Marth's usage, assuming a rational playerbase (it may shrink slightly anyway just because people are dumb). However, they can accomplish what those other characters accomplish so they would detract from them. Consider a dummy game of simple triangular balance.

A > B > C > A

We would expect that A, B, and C would be used 1/3 in a stable metagame. However, let's introduce a D who is the same as B. Our new numbers are A and C being used 1/3 each while B and D are used 1/6 each. That's the stable metagame, and it's parallel to my example.

Of course, in the real game, characters don't quite match up 1 to 1, but regardless there are frequently clashes between radically different characters to do the same "job". I really don't feel like giving an example here, but pretty much every character is affected by this to some degree (and some to much bigger degrees than others). It's the reason Ankoku styled lists are interesting curiosities but not legitimately good foundations for character quality evaluation (though I'd hesitate to call such stats useless).

I didn't contradict myself; you just didn't understand.

Essentially you're saying that we have characters who have the same matchups as another character (i.e. falco A's matchup chart in terms of ratios is identical to falco B), but their gameplay differs significantly.

Hence, were you to introduce these extra 3 characters into melee, marth's (absolute) popularity would decrease.


For the latter point, two entirely different characters are going to have entirely different strengths and weaknesses. Hence, opponents which can't deal with the strengths/can't capitalise on weaknesses have bad matchups against said character, while those who can have good ones. There is no way two characters can have exactly the same strengths and weaknesses without being identical. As soon as you change anything (down to changing the hit/hurtbox of an animation by a pixel or something miniscule), their strengths/weaknesses will change (in proportion to the size of the change).

 

[Chum]

You would need 6 months to actually compare them and I don't even think they will be accurate because a MK less metagame would be much different IMO.

I thought thats what the point was? To see how the meta game would be like if mk didn't exist. I'm against the ban but I think it would be interesting to see the results and data of a meta game with out meta-knight.

 

[Banee]

Okay this was really bothering me so I feel I need to point it.

Yuna you replied to:

It's quite easy for you to refute people's points when you make them up in your head. Stop claiming I said things I didn't say. It makes you a liar, a strawmanner and just an altogether very bad debater.

So Yuna, could you point at where specifically in that quote he claimed you said something you didnt say (or claimed you said anything at all, actually)? I'm sure its just my poor reading comprehension at work, so I would like you to clear that up for me.

 

[XienZo]

I believe Yuna was talking about how Yuna never argued you'd be able to punish MK by DIing out.

 

[Banee]

I believe Yuna was talking about how Yuna never argued you'd be able to punish MK by DIing out.

If this is the case, it seems rather odd that he would quote that part of it. It seems to me the part he quoted was just a point of clarification.

 

[XienZo]

Nah, he always quotes all the wrong things you do. If you did argue something right, he'll just say, uh-huh, agreed, or I never said that wasn't true.

 

[Banee]

Nah, he always quotes all the wrong things you do. If you did argue something right, he'll just say, uh-huh, agreed, or I never said that wasn't true.

My point is, the part that he quoted doesnt contain the things he claims it does. If his response isnt meant for that specific quote, why did he quote it right above said response?

 

[Grunt]

After making this point (above), I have come to the realization that if Brawl didn't suck we wouldn't have to be bickering like this. >_>

Someone finally gets it!
XD

 

[SwastikaPyle]

So Yuna is actually arguing that you can't punish MK?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

So Yuna is actually arguing that you can't punish MK?

Yes and no.

Even though he was talking about MK being less of a threat with DI, some characters can't punish DI'd out of attacks and some can.

 

[Iwan]

The whole flaw with the argument you're trying to put up AZ is that comparing a dominant melee character to a dominant brawl character is far too different. Remember, we had AT's to counter tons of different things in melee, we lack as many technical options in brawl. Honestly, let's say we had metaknight in melee, with a million jumps, ridiculous gimping ability, priority AND the ability to wavedash, L-cancel, etc.....

People would have wanted him banned in melee as well. Hypothetical or not, it's still relevant, and just look at the properties each character has and it's clear that marth isn't on the same level as "brokeness" as metaknight. It's stupid, really. I mean hell, there's even debate to this day as to whether marth is even the best character in melee or not. Some strongly argue that Sheik is the best character in that game, or fox or falco or marth. There's argument there, and it's because the characters (especially the higher tiers) are very good and can do well against each other.

In brawl, metaknight is unquestionably the best character in the game. No one would argue Gdubs or D3, Marth or Falco or ROB...it's clear that metaknight has not a single bad match up. Some would argue he has one or two even match ups (although that's really stretching it). The point is, if two good players of equal skill are playing eachother, it should come down to metaknight dittos.

Why pick anyone else besides metaknight when you play the game competitively? He gives you the best chance to win, without question, in nearly every match up. Why doesn't the anti-ban side just change it's argument to "Good players should either pick metaknight or always be at a disadvantage.....or just be as good as Azen/Ninjalink/*insert random super talented player here*". 99 percent of the smash population IS NOT as good as azen (who, according to OS, is currently PRO BAN for metaknight, if what OS said on the podcast was true).

No other character will "swap places" and become the new broken character once metaknight leaves. Every other character has bad match ups, while metaknight doesn't.

 

[AlphaZealot]

There is no flaw in the argument. People say "but look at results! MK dominates!". The retort is: it is no worse then Marth in Melee, so you will have to wait for it to get worse or use subjective arguments, like the one you just put forth Iwan.

 

[Iwan]

There is no flaw in the argument. People say "but look at results! MK dominates!". The retort is: it is no worse then Marth in Melee, so you will have to wait for it to get worse or use subjective arguments, like the one you just put forth Iwan.

Fair enough. Just note that it's possible these two games are different enough to the point where not just tournament data proves or disproves anything. I would agree that the game isn't done developing, but also would say that nothing earth shattering will come about to counter metaknight.

That's just my opinion though, and like you said, that's subjective.

After watching some of plank's vids i can't help but be disgusted though....ugh. lol.

 

[salaboB]

There is no flaw in the argument. People say "but look at results! MK dominates!". The retort is: it is no worse then Marth in Melee, so you will have to wait for it to get worse or use subjective arguments, like the one you just put forth Iwan.

The matchups are not subjective.

Neither is the partial soft ban, which is largely responsible for MK not being more dominating.