Meta Knight Officially Banned!

[Vinylic.]

See players continue the B mashing.

 

[Ripple]

It requires you to be more skilled rather than relying on an advantage. How is that bannable?

because we have it set up so that if you lose you should be able to get an advantage on your opponent. MK prevents this in all forms.

it's the way smash has always worked.

 

[Spelt]

Prove me wrong. What's ban-able about MK?

"ban-able"

MK doesn't have winning matchups on everyone. He has a lot of even ones.

No he doesn't.

If you're getting this information solely from the BBR MU chart then you really need to re-evaluate your arguments.

You know....even. A matchup that requires you to be more skilled than your opponent.

....Are you kidding me?
Not even going to bother with this one.

MK isn't an autowin versus anyone above mid/high tier.

The argument is practically writing itself.


TL;DR You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Tommy_G]

because we have it set up so that if you lose you should be able to get an advantage on your opponent. MK prevents this in all forms.

it's the way smash has always worked.

So don't lose the first game. You lost so you're suppose to be down. We're not suppose to be computers in Mario Kart. We don't get speed boosts because we're way behind.

Characters haven't been banned in Smash. It's the way Smash has always worked.

Again just like all of the other pro-ban people, Spelt has proven they have no factual argument for why MK needs to be banned. They just shut down everyone else says and insults them to the point where other idiots jump on his **** because they don't know what to believe themselves.

 

[Ripple]

So don't lose the first game. You lost so you're suppose to be down. We're not suppose to be computers in Mario Kart. We don't get speed boosts because we're way behind.

Characters haven't been banned in Smash. It's the way Smash has always worked.

so now you believe that if a player wins the first game THEY should be able to cp the one who lost?

are you ****ing kidding me?

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Yeah and none of them have proven MK to have anything banworthy to his name (in my opinion).

That's what it comes down to. Your convinced otherwise. Many others are convinced of the opposite. You reject the reasons people have put forth, others see them as legitimate reasons.

It also comes back to what constitutes as a bannable character. Everyone has their own definition of where you draw the line. It just so happens there seems to be in flux of many people agreeing that we can draw that line now instead of earlier in brawls lifespan.

 

[link2702]

characters weren't banned before in smash because no character before has truly proved to be this big a problem.

 

[Conviction]

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=5273374

 

[Tommy_G]

so now you believe that if a player wins the first game THEY should be able to cp the one who lost?

are you ****ing kidding me?

I love the putting words into my mouth part. That's adorable.

Each game should counterpick them due to their styles and to stages they were comfortable to play on, not simply because character A has an advantage on character B.

characters weren't banned before in smash because before no character before has truly proved to be this big a problem.

Pikachu in Smash 64 has an advantage over every other character in the game. Not banned.

Jigglypuff won more national tournaments in a row than MK has. Not banned.

 

[Divinokage]

So don't lose the first game. You lost so you're suppose to be down. We're not suppose to be computers in Mario Kart. We don't get speed boosts because we're way behind.

Characters haven't been banned in Smash. It's the way Smash has always worked.

Again just like all of the other pro-ban people, Spelt has proven they have no factual argument for why MK needs to be banned. They just shut down everyone else says and insults them to the point where other idiots jump on his **** because they don't know what to believe themselves.

Lol, just stfu.. if you can't handle a change then you should stop going ape **** for no reason.

 

[~Tac~]

Pikachu doesn't fly, have descending priority, and can't Uair 3 times per jump without losing altitude. Also can't CP to stages that move and time out. Can't really compare 64 Pikachu to MK. Ever. Plus. MK doesn't have a ****ing party hat.

 

[Spelt]

Again just like all of the other pro-ban people, Spelt has proven they have no factual argument for why MK needs to be banned. They just shut down everyone else says and insults them to the point where other idiots jump on his **** because they don't know what to believe themselves.

You haven't given any concrete facts to why MK should stay legal.

Most of what you say is blatantly incorrect, "MK has even matchups."

M2K would probably even disagree with that statement currently, and we all know how biased he is when it comes to MK's matchups.

It's obvious you've done absolutely no research on this subject and all of your arguments come from the "let's play the game the way we bought it" mentality.

You are in no position to criticize anyone's arguments.
At all.

 

[WindMajor]

Again just like all of the other pro-ban people, Spelt has proven they have no factual argument for why MK needs to be banned. They just shut down everyone else says and insults them to the point where other idiots jump on his **** because they don't know what to believe themselves.

I know I have allergies today, but that's no reason to be avoiding my posts.


Again, if there is reason to take action against MK's planking, then he is bannable.

 

[link2702]

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=5273377

 

[stingers]

idk tournament attendance already proves that mk ban tourneys get more entrants lol. which is what matters if we want to expand the popularity of the game and get more people interested...so it's overall worth it...so just stop *****ing and let him stay banned lol

 

[Tommy_G]

Pikachu doesn't fly, have descending priority, and can't Uair 3 times per jump without losing altitude. Also can't CP to stages that move and time out. Can't really compare 64 Pikachu to MK. Ever. Plus. MK doesn't have a ****ing party hat.

Pikachu can combo people to side death and gets free recoveries due to the mechanics of his up B on nearly the whole cast. He also has the safest approaches, easiest initiators into combos, and combos to death or at least 70%(100% is usually death.) Pikachu's up air and fsmash (both ridiculous spacing tools and edge-guarding tools) have transcendent priority.

Pikachu's party hat is stylish. Don't hate.

 

[Ghostbone]

characters weren't banned before in smash because no character before has truly proved to be this big a problem.

Eh, again, Masterhand in Melee.
He's not "technically" banned, but I'd like to see someone try to use him at Apex.

 

[Vinylic.]

So don't lose the first game. You lost so you're suppose to be down. We're not suppose to be computers in Mario Kart. We don't get speed boosts because we're way behind.

Characters haven't been banned in Smash. It's the way Smash has always worked.

Again just like all of the other pro-ban people, Spelt has proven they have no factual argument for why MK needs to be banned. They just shut down everyone else says and insults them to the point where other idiots jump on his **** because they don't know what to believe themselves.

You didn't bring anything up about why MK should be legal yet you related a quote with Mario Kart?

 

[Conviction]

I love the putting words into my mouth part. That's adorable.

Each game should counterpick them due to their styles and to stages they were comfortable to play on, not simply because character A has an advantage on character B.



Pikachu in Smash 64 has an advantage over every other character in the game. Not banned.

Jigglypuff won more national tournaments in a row than MK has. Not banned.

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=5273387

I love the putting words into my mouth part. That's adorable.

Each game should counterpick them due to their styles and to stages they were comfortable to play on, not simply because character A has an advantage on character B.

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=5273378

 

[Krystedez]

You're... what? Why are you comparing 64? Everyone in that god damn game can combo like a master. Pika just gets it easier. He's not like, increasing the gap of the S tier and A tier (or is Pika even IN S tier? LOL) like Meta is every year.

God... what a... useless argument... my... what... ugh.

I liked it better when people compared other Fighting games outside of smash, because it was entertaining. This is just... not even funny or right in the least.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Having to remove a playable character is gutting, or cutting if you prefer, a portion of the game for competitive play. Brawl has clearly gone far further than any previous Smash game. I understand what you are trying to do here, spin my words around to prove your point. The problem is it just does not logically add up like you are hoping for.

Do you understand that you're doing the exact same thing that the TO's are doing, actually? Making rules for the game to make it playable and balanced for all. It's only on a different level. The difference is that we did not create the game at all. So instead, we're taking what we have and running with it. Banning stuff is within their perfect legal rights for running the tournaments. As I said before, you can very easily run those kind of tournaments if you wish to. Nobody's stopping you. Go find a bunch of people and make an agreement. I hope it honestly turns out well for you.

If you want to make that claim, back it up. Tell me, what specific gameplay elements they are removing with Balenced Brawl that make it far worse than banning a character? I need details because you are making a very specific argument. If you actually find something, explain why that can not be changed back while keeping the rest of the positive changes. Good luck.

Let's start off then: Removing infinites. Infinites aren't removed in our regular gameplay, they're allowed. Next up are stages. Note how we're not changing the stages in any way for what we can do. Overall, we are not changing the gameplay elements whatsoever. Not in the same way you're thinking. The only thing we change is the mindset, not the coding in the game. People will play differently because they practice with different settings that can be easily set up. Any tournament can have different rules. Pretending that they don't exist is ridiculous. If you want changes, we put in changes. You're suggesting changes just as much we are.

If someone does not have access to at least a dial-up connection, cannot afford a $6 SD card and $3 reader, or doesn't have a computer with USB support, they probably should put that tournament travel money towards making rent instead.

Ah, this is my favorite one here: Let's presume everybody is allowed to order stuff online, oh, wait, they're not. You know some kids are taken to this huge tournies by adults, but wouldn't allow them to order stuff online, nor would they do that for them. Likewise, don't presume that everybody trusts ordering things online. They can come damaged. It's not guaranteed you can get this all quickly enough anyway. You know, when you order stuff, it takes time to get there.

Also, one more thing: You completely complain about TO's forcing a very specific gameplay style, where if they adopted Balanced Brawl, it'd be the same thing as is. It would be no different from the problem you with this oppression crap. You're doing the same thing to us, telling us we should only play one way. I very much honestly love the irony here.

 

[Glöwworm]

Pikachu in 64 should be in its own tier.

 

[Tommy_G]

All that matters is Pikachu has at least a 60-40 matchup vs every character in the game.

MK doesn't have that.

 

[Ghostbone]

You're... what? Why are you comparing 64? Everyone in that god damn game can combo like a master. Pika just gets it easier. He's not like, increasing the gap of the S tier and A tier (or is Pika even IN S tier? LOL) like Meta is every year.

God... what a... useless argument... my... what... ugh.

Pika and Fox share S tier, though some some of the people who made the tier list admitted Fox should be in A tier, but it just looks nicer with him in S >.>

Anyway with 64, the tournament scene is practically non-existent for that, the skill gaps are much smaller, and the game is much better balanced overall.
Banning Pikachu would not help the game at all like banning MK would.

 

[Krystedez]

All that matters is Pikachu has at least a 60-40 matchup vs every character in the game.

MK doesn't have that.

It is argued that he does have a +1 against everyone if not better. +1 is apparently equivalent to 60-40 or 55-45.

I don't... even.. -_-

 

[~Tac~]

Transcendent. Tired. Also, Pikachu doesn't have three recovery moves, 4 frame-ish downsmash.

MK also have like 70+ -30 matchups. Including a 95 to 5 or something. Absurd.

And MK still has no party hat. Therefore, bannable.

 

[Ghostbone]

All that matters is Pikachu has at least a 60-40 matchup vs every character in the game.

He...goes even with Fox and Falcon....-facepalm-
/well if it's not even, it's way closer to even than any of MK's match-ups.

 

[Spelt]

How many argument's has tommy completely evaded now?


Why is he still even trying?

 

[Krystedez]

bad argument is bad, let's go back to comparing yun to MK or something, that's funnier.

 

[Xzax Kasrani]

Also the fact that a bunch of randoms, and players who haven't accomplished anything in this game were able to vote on this poll makes me uneasy on him being banned.

 

[Ripple]

He also has the safest approaches,

this is false, fox does

easiest initiators into combos,

false, falcon

Pikachu's up air and fsmash have transcendent priority.

no they don't.

do research and someone might take you seriously

 

[link2702]

tommy's arguments are falling more and more apart...

 

[Tommy_G]

It shouldn't have to be "what makes him not ban-able?" That's like asking "Why is the defendant innocent?"

All of you who posted completely ignored my points and never gave me a legit reply to them that wasn't filled with insults and rage.


Transcendent priority is having a hitbox where you don't have a hurtbox. Pika's uair and fsmash do that.

 

[~Tac~]

I didn't. Pikachu's hat is stylish. MK lacks it. Therefore, bannable.

 

[Conviction]

Also the fact that a bunch of randoms, and players who haven't accomplished anything in this game were able to vote on this poll makes me uneasy on him being banned.

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=5273390

 

[Krystedez]

But you said

All that matters is Pikachu has at least a 60-40 matchup vs every character in the game.

MK doesn't have that.

Iblis, I resisted using that objection meme because it's annoyingn now use actual pictures or something funnier plz :3

 

[Divinokage]

It shouldn't have to be "what makes him not ban-able?" That's like asking "Why is the defendant innocent?"

All of you who posted completely ignored my points and never gave me a legit reply to them that wasn't filled with insults and rage.


Transcendent priority is having a hitbox where you don't have a hurtbox. Pika's uair and fsmash do that.

You aren't worthy of a reply.

 

[link2702]

@iblis

needed da music to make that more awesome.

 

[Vinylic.]

I didn't. Pikachu's hat is stylish. MK lacks it. Therefore, bannable.

I laughed.

 

[Xzax Kasrani]

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=5273390

you are one of the people I am referring too...who the **** are you?