Meta Knight Officially Banned!

[Kink-Link5]

It isn't that I'd rather not learn to face the character, but instead that from a logical perspective, why pick anyone except Metaknight to go against Metaknight? It's not like I'd gain any tactical or technical advantage by picking someone else.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

everyone needs to watch this video if they haven't seen it yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwG1t1DExXc

no they don't that video is bad and you should feel bad for posting it. Mike Haze should feel bad for making it and I feel bad for watching it.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I think that video gave me tuberculosis. No lie.

 

[SpongeJordan]

What is wrong with some of the top TO's coming together to establish a rulset? How is that bad for the community? For those guys who actually travel OOS don't have to worry about different CP's and things of that nature.

Okay, you misunderstand what the issue with URC is. The idea of having a standardized ruleset amongst top TOs is one thing. It's a great idea. There is, however, a difference between saying "MK is banned within the Unity Ruleset!" and "MK is OFFICIALLY banned!"

Catch my drift? A few of the top TOs (Not even all of them) does not constitute as the entire community. Meaning other top TOs get the shaft because they disagree with the idea of forcing a ruleset upon the entire community rather than the entire community coming together to form a ruleset.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

no they don't that video is bad and you should feel bad for posting it. Mike Haze should feel bad for making it and I feel bad for watching it.

He even started spamming it on 3 different topics(including one he started for it alone) on GameFAQs. That's how annoying it's getting. I'm quite glad YouTube isn't working at the moment, really.

Also, people, please stop posting it. It isn't beneficial to this topic anyway.

^ Then ask AlphaZealot to change the topic title to correct that. Miscommunication really seems to be the only problem, then. Atleast from what you're now getting at.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Atleast they are relatively objective reasons nonetheless though AZ.

Theres nothing wrong with that, but they shouldn't force it onto other TOs by not stickying their threads if they deserve a sticky just because they don't use the "unity ruleset"

They're not forcing it on other TO's. You can choose to use it or not choose to use it. If you decide to not use the ruleset then that's what you're left with.

Okay, you misunderstand what the issue with URC is. The idea of having a standardized ruleset amongst top TOs is one thing. It's a great idea. There is, however, a difference between saying "MK is banned within the Unity Ruleset!" and "MK is OFFICIALLY banned!"

Catch my drift? A few of the top TOs (Not even all of them) does not constitute as the entire community. Meaning other top TOs get the shaft because they disagree with the idea of forcing a ruleset upon the entire community rather than the entire community coming together to form a ruleset.

What other top TO's ? I do believe that the UCR has a lot of credibility with it's current members. Enough to the point where they can say MK get's the boot. Once again I don't believe you've read the first post and saw how they've come to this decision. I don't think you've seen all of the ban MK polls and etc etc etc the community has spoken TO's and top players. Anyways if you're not going to bother reading up on things or just continue with your silly misconceptions there's no point in continuing this.

 

[Krystedez]

. Meaning other top TOs get the shaft because they disagree with the idea of forcing a ruleset upon the entire community rather than the entire community coming together to form a ruleset.

How so?

Other TOs can disagree and run their own ruleset, just as they have before. And will continue doing. URC is not forcing a ruleset on anyone. They are asking people who wish to be supported by the more reknown and respected TOs and SWF to run unity, which means livestreams/sticky threads/etc... along with coverage I'd imagine, and also ranking priveledges of players running the standard at that point in time.

This reminds me, does John/Tuen, whoever else who does research, have to make an entire new ranking, or just continue on, now that MK is banned on Unity? What is the relationship between meta game research and unity? Are they tied directly?

 

[Claire Diviner]

So now people are arguing over tournament rules in the advent of MK's ban, and whether tourneys should get stickied or not based on TOs and... numbers? All of this nonsense is really starting to make my head hurt. X______x

 

[SpongeJordan]

^ Then ask AlphaZealot to change the topic title to correct that. Miscommunication really seems to be the only problem, then. Atleast from what you're now getting at.

I'd have to ask him to change EVERYTHING involving the Unity Ruleset. The idea of the so-wittily-named UNITY Ruleset is that it brings everyone together under a single ruleset. It'll never happen if you baselessly claim an entire ruleset and cards and what not. It should be a community effort to build a ruleset, not a handful of top TOs.

I don't see what purpose the Senate even has at this point.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Seriously can we really get back to something important like the discussion of stages I really want my wario CP's back.

@kryst if you only gonna hold the tournies for fun then that's cool. I saw your post earlier but didn't get a chance to respond . I thought you were tying to boycott the UCR =/ .

 

[SpongeJordan]

Green Greens! People ban Brinstar against my Lucas too often now =[

 

[Ussi]

That's a nice gesture, but hype isn't enough to outdo stickies on the main tournament page, especially for pot fillers.

The sticky privilege is an incentive to run unity

I'd have to ask him to change EVERYTHING involving the Unity Ruleset. The idea of the so-wittily-named UNITY Ruleset is that it brings everyone together under a single ruleset. It'll never happen if you baselessly claim an entire ruleset and cards and what not. It should be a community effort to build a ruleset, not a handful of top TOs.

The only top TO not in unity is Alex Strife

 

[Claire Diviner]

I'd have to ask him to change EVERYTHING involving the Unity Ruleset. The idea of the so-wittily-named UNITY Ruleset is that it brings everyone together under a single ruleset. It'll never happen if you baselessly claim an entire ruleset and cards and what not. It should be a community effort to build a ruleset, not a handful of top TOs.

If only the same can be said about real world laws...

I still say this whole Unity thing and arguing over it is pretty pointless. Yeah, not being able to create a ruleset as a community defeats the purpose of the term "Unity", but it's still nothing to get worked up over. I mean, it's not like one has to use the Unity ruleset. The catch is that their tourney will not get stickied... I guess. Is it really that big a deal? Perhaps in hindsight, but meh.

 

[Labernash]

So much Salt.

It's a video game. Let's play it, MK or no MK.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

I'd have to ask him to change EVERYTHING involving the Unity Ruleset. The idea of the so-wittily-named UNITY Ruleset is that it brings everyone together under a single ruleset. It'll never happen if you baselessly claim an entire ruleset and cards and what not. It should be a community effort to build a ruleset, not a handful of top TOs.

Read some posts above. It was a community effort. Stop denying it wasn't. No, you just have to ask him to clarify the topic title to be a bit more clear. Now I ask what everybody else has: Have you atleast read the opening post? Or did you just barrel in, skipping everything, to post about your sadness about a ban? We've provided tons of information as is.

What's funny is that this isn't a "Unity ruleset needs to be changed topic", it's a "Meta Knight is banned" topic. If you have problems with the Unity Ruleset in general, take it to a different spot. Also, I'd trust TO's who actually have seen the things that go on. Atleast they KNOW what they're talking about after all. That needs little to be confirmed.

 

[AlphaZealot]

I'd have to ask him to change EVERYTHING involving the Unity Ruleset. The idea of the so-wittily-named UNITY Ruleset is that it brings everyone together under a single ruleset. It'll never happen if you baselessly claim an entire ruleset and cards and what not. It should be a community effort to build a ruleset, not a handful of top TOs.

Well over half (I believe right now about 70% actually, July was close to 90%) of the tournaments run in a given month use the Unity Ruleset. I believe at this point we have already seen 100 different Unity Ruleset events since the ruleset came out last April.

More tournaments use the Unity ruleset than any other ruleset in the history of the Brawl community and (probably) the history of Smash in general. It's usage is also increasing.

There is nothing baseless about TO's making rules for tournaments. The Unity Ruleset Committee may even get to the point soon where the top/most active 20 TO's in the country are in it (that is the goal by the end of this year) in which case the committee wil itself actually run about 1/4th of all Smash tournaments, maybe more.

There is something baseless about players making rules for tournaments. They can give input. TO's should listen. In the end though, a player cannot enforce the rules he is trying to make. It would therefor be unequal: the TO has the facility and ability to not only make, but to enforce rules, while a player only has the ability to give input on rules, but not enforce them. That is a huge distinction, and also why the previous BBR-Recommended Ruleset would never have been adopted widely.

In the end, the Unity Ruleset Committee is a group of TO's who are working together and running the same rules and making decisions in unison, and these decisions actually matter because they implement those decisions at their tournaments.

 

[Claire Diviner]

So much Salt.

It's a video game. Let's play it, MK or no MK.

^ This. So much this.

Yes, people take the game seriously on a competitive level, especially with prize money involved and the funds needed to travel to tournaments, but in the end, it is a game... albeit a fun and competitive one.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Well over half (I believe right now about 70% actually, July was close to 90%) of the tournaments run in a given month use the Unity Ruleset. I believe at this point we have already seen 100 different Unity Ruleset events since the ruleset came out last April.

More tournaments use the Unity ruleset than any other ruleset in the history of the Brawl community and (probably) the history of Smash in general. It's usage is also increasing.

There is nothing baseless about TO's making rules for tournaments. The Unity Ruleset Committee may even get to the point soon where the top/most active 20 TO's in the country are in it (that is the goal by the end of this year) in which case the committee wil itself actually run about 1/4th of all Smash tournaments, maybe more.

Are the UCR tournies gonna be give out more money? Than your average tourney? What are the perks of going to a UCR event ?

 

[KoRoBeNiKi]

maybe to get people used to this, Strife should add MK banned singles as a side event to Apex, lol.

 

[Krystedez]

maybe to get people used to this, Strife should add MK banned singles as a side event to Apex, lol.

That ... actually might be a good idea, if Apex doesn't already have enough events going on at once lol.

 

[AlphaZealot]

At the moment there are no perks (other than stickies/coverage/whatever). It is possible in the future some things may change - there is already one thing that will likely change as an incentive but won't be implemented until 2012 (not talking at all about the MK ban). Also, more of an incentive for players not just for the host.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

At the moment there are no perks (other than stickies/coverage/whatever). It is possible in the future some things may change - there is already one thing that will likely change as an incentive but won't be implemented until 2012 (not talking at all about the MK ban). Also, more of an incentive for players not just for the host.

There should be some player perks. You could should also do points or something.

At the end of the day I think people would be more inclined to go if there was more money involved.

 

[da K.I.D.]

no they don't that video is bad and you should feel bad for posting it. Mike Haze should feel bad for making it and I feel bad for watching it.

I think that video gave me tuberculosis. No lie.

this is one of the greatest 2 hit comboes, ive ever seen.

The only top TO not in unity is Alex Strife

and keitaro. I dontknow about everyone else, but I went to the last ktar, and I consider him a top to.

they disagree with the idea of forcing a ruleset upon the entire community rather than the entire community coming together to form a ruleset.

It should be a community effort to build a ruleset, not a handful of top TOs.

this is cute because you think its actually possible.

News flash dude, nobody has ever trusted THE ENTIRETY of a populace to come to a single conclusion on anything. asking for that is a rediculous pipe dream. Nothing would ever get done if we tried to do things that way.

Are the UCR tournies gonna be give out more money? Than your average tourney? What are the perks of going to a UCR event ?

knowing that its always going to be the same ruleset is perk enough for me.

I have heard a 'What?! Thats (not) legal here!' At pretty much every tourney ive been to ever. (usually im the one saying it.) so that alone is great for me

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

knowing that its always going to be the same ruleset is perk enough for me.

I have heard a 'What?! Thats (not) legal here!' At pretty much every tourney ive been to ever. (usually im the one saying it.) so that alone is great for me

I think that's pretty big also since you don't get hit with anything out of no where. I was thinking something small along the lines of waived entry free or byes if you won a tourney. I know there's a magic tourney series that gives you byes for like 2 or 3 rounds if you do well at the events . UCR player of the year award (person with most wins and or top 8) or something like that.

 

[da K.I.D.]

snap. thats kinda baller. and than people wouldnt have to worry about getting ally first round of a tourney anymore lol (happened to me once, i was a sad panda :[ )

 

[Ussi]

and keitaro. I dontknow about everyone else, but I went to the last ktar, and I consider him a top to.

While I do agree, he's inactive for hosting for now which is why he left URC.

I guess I was just mentioning active ones

 

[Bees!]

everyone needs to watch this video if they haven't seen it yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwG1t1DExXc

I watched it with this pulled up...
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

yep he used a ton of them alright.

 

[Bizkit047]

At the moment there are no perks (other than stickies/coverage/whatever). It is possible in the future some things may change - there is already one thing that will likely change as an incentive but won't be implemented until 2012 (not talking at all about the MK ban). Also, more of an incentive for players not just for the host.

Even I haven't heard anything about this...and that sounds hype.

 

[LKratos]

Greetings smashboards!

I am generic low level competitive smash player A!

Seeing the various amounts and consistencies of **** being flown back and forth in this thread has caused me to come out of my lurker shell and actually make a post!

I'm not even going to address the argument as to why MK should, or should not be banned. That is not the issue here, because no matter how much of that minority who doesn't want him banned complains about it, URC is not going to magically change their minds. It's funny, when a decision is made about something, be it on here, on another site, another game, the US government, you hear the most out of dissenters. People who agree with the decision just don't have that much to say.

Anyway, what I WOULD like to address is the paradigm of "choice".

I've read arguments in here that say "people should be given the CHOICE of whether or not MK be banned in their tournament".

Well, it's really funny you say that. Let's hypothesize for a moment that URC DIDN'T make this decision for unity rules. They just didn't say anything. But they still agreed upon the decision. What would happen?

If you attended ANY of the tournaments that any of the 14 consenting opinions hosted (this includes MLG and many other national tournaments), you would instead have those 14 TO's independently CHOOSING to ban MK at their tournaments.

So you know what URC? You don't even need to impose a MK ban for unity rules. Unity rules previously already stated that TO's wanting to alter the rules slightly, such as banning MK, can do so. So URC could just not even change the rules at all, and still just have MK banned at their tournaments. It changes NOTHING. Adding it to unity rules simply creates a standard from which (apparently 75% of) the community agrees upon, and adheres to for smashboards endorsed tournaments.

You don't like the fact that your MK legal tournament won't be stickied on smashboards? Well too bad, you don't own smashboards, and you don't make the rules for what gets stickied. Complain as much as you want; a majority of the smash community is going to enjoy the game more now.

"But those 75% of the community are just scrubs, they aren't that good at the game so they shouldn't have a say in things!"

Funny, because by that logic voting polls for government positions should have an IQ entrance exam. Wouldn't it be nice if all the ignorant people who are less educated than you are weren't allowed to vote? Equality is a *****.

Anyway, I've said all I really wanted to say. I don't have any credentials, I'm a VA toon link main with a pocket MK for CPs in matchups I don't know that well who wins local tournaments sometimes. Haters gonna hate, I'm looking forward to the development of the brawl metagame from this point forward, and I hope you all have a wonderful night.

 

[Krystedez]

Bees!, everytime I see your username I think of that gif image someone posted a while ago.

BEES! BEES! BEES! BEES! BEES! BEES!

It's hilarious.

Oh and I already posted my analysis on Haze's video too, he didnt link his main "points" and his original contention of evaluating members... lol..

[collapse="Pointless but fair analyses of "WHO EXACTLY BANNED METAKNIGHT?"]

...Mike, like I said, I never cared if you wanted MK banned or not, nor did I say that you were discreditting (but rather you ARE ignoring) evidence of John#'s charts and other research devoted to the overall decision made here. This includes judging Meta Knight's influence on the metagame, and having one member who's played or used them for a purpose or another is even better than NO ONE PLAYS METAKNIGHT WHY?

I'm not discussing this with you by PM, because it's not appropriate. I feel it's necessary other people know just how muddled up your points got, and why I think you're being unreasonable and vague, as well as not making sense when you tell me that you're not talking about Meta Knight, when at the core, that's what the whole point of the video ends up being about: The decision.
______________________
0:14-0:16 - Your attention getter.

"...decided today that Meta Knight is going to be banned from tourney play."

0:16-0:21

"If you've been following any of the drama on smashboards, this probably doesn't come as much as a surprise to you."

______________________
You then decide to actually work into your supposed thesis. You got the attention getter out. You want to let people know who the URC members are. And their qualifications. You put a few bit of details on each of them.

______________________
1:45-1:52 - Evidence
"Out of these 17 members, 14 members voted to ban Meta Knight, there was one abstaining, and two inactive."

You now touch on the actual evidence you want to use to portray the qualifications of the URC member base as a whole. You continue with . . .

______________________
1:53-1:57 - Evidence
"Out of the total 17 members, none of them main Meta Knight."
Is that so?
______________________
1:58-2:01 - Main Point 1
"Here's something to think about. Anybody can be admitted to the URC."
Okay.
______________________
2:09-2:12 - Main Point 1 - Anyone can be in the URC.
"You can potentially be admitted into the URC."
This is interesting, so, what are the limits to being in the URC? Let's see.

1. You have to be able to afford to run tournaments.
2. You have to get a decent amount of attendees and experience (don't give me that "you don't even have to have large tournaments" crap. I know I couldn't get in the URC with my experience as a TO, having run ONE event with unity, that got 7 people and helped Today once or twice in running bracket. you can't honestly tell me that's enough)
______________________
2:12-2:20 - Main Point 2 - Members of BBR are not in URC
"What this brings up is the quality of a member of the URC."
"Previous votes on the Meta Knight ban subject were taken care of by a committee called the Brawl Back Room, which consisted of the most prominent players and tournament organizers in the community."

So, wait, we're now comparing URC to the BBR of past years? Okay, trying to follow here.

You rattle off some good players' names, and continue on:
______________________
2:34-2:36
"The List goes on, but you see my point."

Your point is beginning to get muddled a bit. I believe it's "URC members don't have these players in it " now, when it used to be "I'm going to analyze the URC members directly".

Wonderful... Moving on.
______________________
2:36-2:41 - Main Point 2's Subpoint
"These players that voted on these polls were the best of the best. They truly understood the metagame."

The BBR members consisted of people that hosted tournaments and/or were good players. Their goal was to shape the tier list and come up with as many ideas and projects as possible to help give the community something to talk about, something to discuss, something to adhere to when asking the same questions over and over.

Moving on from that, BBR members aren't the only experts of the metagame.

And let's direct our attention to your top comment and response for a sec:



And you responded quite swiftly with

"You should address the part where Top Players actually have in depth knowledge about game play, unlike many of the TO's in the URC."

I disagree with that. Many of the TO's are in their position in the first place because of how they impacted the community and shown their ability to run tournaments with large numbers. They use a ruleset that community has generally fallen in line with or even liked. Otherwise, they wouldn't have that much attendance and wouldn't be as respected.

Moving on!
______________________
2:43-2:51
"If you were to compare the quality of players that I just mentioned to the current Unity Ruleset Committee, you would understand why the structure of the URC is extremely frustrating to begin with."
All you've shown to me by comparing them is that the URC doesn't have the Greats like ADHD and Ally or M2K and Gnes. You've shown to me that the members of URC's skill level is loads lower than those guys who are or USED to be in the BBR, or need to be if they aren't already. You have shown to me, that in order for a player to be qualified to make decisions as member of the URC, they have to be up to par, have to be the same mindset and understanding of the meta game as these players, and that it's a direct relationship with their skill level.

At least, you have shown to me that this is your opinion, and I'm not convinced that a decision such as banning Meta Knight would have been dealt with any better than it was now. The decision and all decisions made in the URC are by members that do have a good understanding of the meta game and have used Meta Knight or know his characteristics in the current metagame.

I mentioned John#'s and other research held in this regard as even more evidence to show that the players in the URC understand the metagame. Perhaps they don't understand it EXACTLY how top players do. But they have an understanding nonetheless, and it isn't right for you to judge that understanding as being a direct relationship with their skill level. You are not qualified to judge the amount of understanding. They are simply different.

Your thesis was originally identifying the members and their qualifications of the URC. The title however says "WHO EXACTLY BANNED META KNIGHT", you never brought up the quality of each member specifically, but hoard them all up in a direct measure of their knowledge of the metagame and whether or not they main MK. You then yell at me for saying it's all about Meta Knight, when I'm clearly just identifying the weakness of your thesis (or lack thereof).

In other words, your points were strong attention getters but not backed up by any sort of evidence or personal experience with the URC being unqualified, except with your opinion that top players with higher skill would have been more qualified to make decisions in such a critical time... Your two main points don't align with your thesis.

Finishing that end off with my comment on your 3:00 marker earlier, how I said "Why don't MK mains go out and host tournaments, then?" That was like, a comment toward your idea that anyone can join. If that is true, then why haven't players went out of their way to host tournaments, so they can be apart of the decision making?

I'll finish up with the rest of the other points made..
______________________
3:18-3:22
"I'd love to see some members of the URC try to commentate some live matches"

I think AZ commentated on some live matches with Day's tournament. I'm not sure. I don't see why they wouldn't be capable of commentating, or how that's relevant at all to your thesis.

______________________
3:24-3:27
"I feel some of the members are completely biased and un-knowledgeable about the meta game."

Why is that? What is your measure of their knowledge? Evidence? At all?

That wraps up my comments on this. I could care less if you don't respond, but I mean, I'll just have to ask; why bother wasting time posting a video blog about it and then linking it to everyone, saying you're giving an opinion on the other URC members? Why don't you discuss it with them, or say outright who you believe are unqualified?

The biggest problem I have with the video is the first and second part of it seem contradictory to me. Your intro made it seem like your goal was to shed light to the community exactly who's in the URC and then expand on each member a bit more. I was really looking forward to it and instantly thought it was a fantastic idea: Any government entity that doesn't "show its face" enough in public easily causes the public to doubt their credibility.

As the video progressed, though, it seemed more to me like you were calling out the URC for being unqualified, which I don't understand. I've been in groups and organizations in the past that have been extremely unorganized and poorly led, but I NEVER revealed that to anyone outside of my family and closest friends. Any community, especially a large one, is easily influenced by a figurehead who commands respect. In this case, you're an incredibly admired, respected, and well-known player. You posting a video immediately commands attention. Your use of a locked-down tripod, a better than decent camera, shot differentiation, and well-calculated and constructed background show you put a lot of effort into the making of this seemingly simple and short video. As a film student, I may pick this up more than others, but your composition no doubt had a subconscious effect on many viewers. This ain't no JG Wentworth shakeycam!

For me personally, this video comprises two objectives, and only one should have been revealed to the public, and it would have been VERY beneficial. Calling out an organization you're part of, though, should be addressed within the organization itself at first, and if you're not getting anywhere, that's when you take it public. Just be wary that pointing fingers at your comrades has its consequences.

While I don't agree with your reasoning, I'm glad to see players such as yourself make personal videos like these. Oftentimes skilled players don't want to dedicate time to give back to the community with videos, but the ones who do really help out the community, especially newer players to the scene. And your video has led to intelligent conversation, not just people literally posting "lol mk banned."

[/collapse]

Read if you dare. Zigsta put a little more emotion into it imo.

 

[Vinylic.]

What a great introduction.

And I posted the BEES! gif.

The one with oprah.

So uh, there's been alot of reading in the past pages.

I skimmed it by reading the first and last paragraph.

It kinda helps.

 

[NinjaFoxX]

>mfw MK being banned

 

[~Tac~]

So much Salt.

It's a video game. Let's play it, MK or no MK.

This, this, this.

izaw stop being a scrub

scrub

also europe doesnt have a big ego we just have a perfectly developed metagame, its not your fault the USA never had someone like willz or teluoborg to megacarry your metagame to victory

willz and teluoborg: never forget

I guess this is why we can't have nice things and Brawl is surrounded by salt and* steered from. Salt from Researchers fueling the regional **** in this damn thread. AND you're from Europe. Good job representing and disproving your "big ego".

 

[LKratos]

europe doesnt have a big ego we just have a perfectly developed metagame

 

[Krystedez]

Well that was a late post, but I will agree.

Anyways... I hope I can run my first MKless tournament during the Spring

 

[El Duderino]

Wrong. Smashstack works on all Wiis. It's a coding error in Brawl itself that allows it to function.

Sorry, just tired of misinformation.

Not to mention the fact that we're past the point where something like Balance Brawl just tweaks Brawl's content to make it better. It's now essentially has a character (Metaknight) that the competitive scene lacks. Add the better character balance and improved stage roster, and its clear which game is easier for competitive play.

As for people who whine about having to load the game through a hack? They can put their man-pants on. Playing Smash competitively already requires people to pay hundreds of dollars to travel cross-country (Or even internationally) A $5 SD card and 30 seconds of worry the first time they load a mod up pales in comparison.

Right on the money. This goes well beyond just Meta Knight. Balenced Brawl has a fix for just about everything wrong but necessary with the current rule set. It is by far the better competitive option, strictly speaking in terms of problems the actual game presents.


Pros:

1. Full roster of characters.
2. More complete list of viable stages.
3. Fix for ******** ledge count rules.
4. Removal of infinates/locks.
5. Improved balence.
6. No more tripping.
7. Less Intrusive rule set necessary.
8. Less bickering over if someone is cheating.​

Cons:

1. SD Card required.
2. Correcting misconceptions about setup and legality.
3. Introducing a new standard.
4. Making sure everyone updates when necessary.
5. Potential for failure if not presented or maintained well.​

The biggest cons holding Balenced Brawl back root from the community, not the game or accessibility (as Shadic pointed out). It's people running around screaming foul and spreading lies that have set it up for failure. So instead we have to settle for a gutted game and overbearing rule set. It is very sad reality when you consider how beneficial the positives could be moving forward.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

Right on the money. This goes well beyond just Meta Knight. Balenced Brawl has a fix for just about everything wrong but necessary with the current rule set. It is by far the better competitive option, strictly speaking in terms of problems the actual game presents.


Pros:

1. Full roster of characters.
2. More complete list of viable stages.
3. Fix for ******** ledge count rules.
4. Removal of infinates/locks.
5. Improved balence.
6. No more tripping.
7. Less Intrusive rule set necessary.
8. Less bickering over if someone is cheating.​

Cons:

1. SD Card required.
2. Correcting misconceptions about setup and legality.
3. Introducing a new standard.
4. Making sure everyone updates when necessary.
5. Potential for failure if not presented or maintained well.​

The biggest cons holding Balenced Brawl back root from the community, not the game or accessibility (as Shadic pointed out). It's people running around screaming foul and spreading lies that have set it up for failure. So instead we have to settle for a gutted game and overbearing rule set. It is very sad reality when you consider how beneficial the positives could be moving forward.

The game is hacked and you're trying to set a new tourney standard with that....good luck I wouldn't hold my breathe.....on second thought maybe you should.

 

[Black Mantis]

This, this, this.



I guess this is why we can't have nice things and Brawl is surrounded steered from. Salt from Researchers fueling the regional **** in this damn thread. AND you're from Europe. Good job representing and disproving your "big ego".

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[LKratos]

The game is hacked and you're trying to set a new tourney standard with that....good luck I wouldn't hold my breathe.....on second thought maybe you should.

This "hack" is rather considered a substitution for first-party balancing patches that every other competitive fighting game gets but smash lacks, for previously explained reasons.

 

[NinjaFoxX]

no trip gets implemented now.