Meta Knight Officially Banned!

[Masky]

Cause people banned almost every stage largely because of MK, banned MK's infinite cape, and banned MK's ability to plank out a whole match. And even with ALL of those nerfs, MK has won every national this year. Seriously, every match WOULD be a JV 4 stock had we left the infinite cape legal.

That's like saying Peach or Jigglypuff are unbeatable in Melee because of infinite wall-bombing and rising pound.

No, tactics like infinite wall bombing and rising pound and perfect planking and IDC are implicitly banned under the "no stalling" rule. MK isn't the only character in Smash who can stall.

 

[Divinokage]

Meta Knight has won SO much since the game's release, even looking at just nationals, that yes, I would venture MK has won more than Jigglypuff even if you give Jigglypuff an extra 6-7 years of existence at tournaments. Of course, poor Jigglypuff never really won anything before Brawl's release anyways, so that is an easy point to make.

Hehe probably... there was never a clear character dominance in melee anyways, which is fun. Anyways, I'll continue to hand out biscuit combos. I still remember that. lol.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Actually Rising Pound is not a broken tactic nor is infinite wall bombing. Rising Pound actually isn't really rising, you lose height every time. About 1/3 of the cast can hit Peach out of the bomber stall, plus the stall only works on certain stages anyways. Rising pound/bomber stall were both banned prematurely if you know your Melee history and basically got C/Ped into every ruleset. No questions were really asked because it didn't really matter, no one was even using either of those techniques anyways. I was always against either of those rules in rulesets but it was to little to late since I only ran Melee tournaments (co-hosting) in 2004/2005. Really it was the pound ruleset that ingrained those rules in every single ruleset ever.

No, tactics like infinite wall bombing and rising pound and perfect planking and IDC are implicitly banned under the "no stalling" rule. MK isn't the only character in Smash who can stall.

Since Brawl's release, no TO has ever, once, enforced the "no stalling rule" out of over 1,300 tournaments.

Speaking of which, I'm 99% sure that is also true when you throw in the 1,000+ Melee tournaments to.

 

[Mike G]

lol nvm..............

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

How much freakin' information do you guys have compiled anyway? Geez.

 

[Masky]

Actually Rising Pound is not a broken tactic nor is infinite wall bombing

Neither is IDC or "perfect planking". IDC is humanly impossible to do to stall the match for a significant amount of time. Perfect planking is beatable through the tactic shown on Metagame Minute.

The point is that in the past, every tactic thought to be stalling has always been dealt with just using the Stalling rule and yet people chose to ignore that rule today.

Since Brawl's release, no TO has ever, once, enforced the "no stalling rule" out of over 1,300 tournaments.

Speaking of which, I'm 99% sure that is also true when you throw in the 1,000+ Melee tournaments to.

Well there you go, I think you found the problem.

 

[AlphaZealot]

In my case: I've been on Smashboards since 2003. I was at many of the nationals in question and I also compiled a lot of the information for way-before-their-time experiments like national rankings. I compiled the first "2007 Melee Year in Review", did backroom work, etc.

Neither is IDC or "perfect planking". IDC is humanly impossible to do to stall the match for a significant amount of time. Perfect planking is beatable through the tactic shown on Metagame Minute.

Want to bet $12,500 that IDC can be done perfectly for 7-8 minutes straight?

Well there you go, I think you found the problem.

I actually agree with this statement somewhat in principle. However, since no TO has ever stepped up and enforced it, it is a losing battle. I have advocated in the past that TO's remove the "no stalling" rule completely since it is never used. Also, it leaves a lot of room for vague decision makings. Is air camping stalling? Is waiting at the edge for the 20 second stalling? Running off the stage with just 5 seconds left and chilling out at the bottom corners? Etc. The "no stalling" rule is badly designed - and as you note, this is a problem.

 

[Tommy_G]

I'm tired and need to study. I'm done posting here for a while, maybe for good if I find better things to do.

You have my permission to think you proved me wrong. I'm too tired to care. *inb4johns*

I leave you all with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3A1nprfuJs

 

[DMG]

It's more than humanly possible to do IDC for a significant period of time. All you have to do is hold down with 1 hand, and flick C stick up with the other. Methodically, it's fairly simply.

Masky I love you usually, but that was just stupid

 

[joeysmash]

just stopping by to saw glad to see this news. i feel this will only make the community stronger (after the initial wave of wtf)

 

[Masky]

It's more than humanly possible to do IDC for a significant period of time. All you have to do is hold down with 1 hand, and flick C stick up with the other. Methodically, it's fairly simply.

Masky I love you usually, but that was just stupid

Well, I've never seen it done but okay.
But again, this is exactly what the stalling rule is for.

I actually agree with this statement somewhat in principle. However, since no TO has ever stepped up and enforced it, it is a losing battle. I have advocated in the past that TO's remove the "no stalling" rule completely since it is never used. Also, it leaves a lot of room for vague decision makings. Is air camping stalling? Is waiting at the edge for the 20 second stalling? Running off the stage with just 5 seconds left and chilling out at the bottom corners? Etc. The "no stalling" rule is badly designed - and as you note, this is a problem.

The "no stalling" rule in its completeness eliminates most of that confusion:

"The act of stalling is banned: stalling is intentionally making the game unplayable: Such as becoming invisible, continuing infinites, chain grabs, or uninterruptible moves past 300%, and reaching a position that your opponent can never reach you."

The only remaining confusion can result from how much stalling is stalling. This was handles better in the BBR ruleset, which banned "excessive" stalling. I recommend that the URC changes the wording to ban "excessive stalling" in order to make this rule make sense again.

In the end though, it is still up to the TO to interpret when stalling is stalling. But according to the precedent set forth already by the URC/BBR-RC and BBR, there is no problem with having TOs interpret the game since we already have TOs interpreting the situation during a pause and in the past ruleset we had TOs interpreting whether infinite chaingrabs were actually infinites or not.

edit:

I have actually called for the stalling rule to be enforced on one of my matches, and it was enforced.

 

[Disfunkshunal]

http://m.ign.com/articles/1197901

 

[Keitaro]

This **** is on ign.com damn!

 

[link2702]

I'm tired and need to study. I'm done posting here for a while, maybe for good if I find better things to do.

You have my permission to think you proved me wrong. I'm too tired to care. *inb4johns*

I leave you all with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3A1nprfuJs

*realizes he lost the battle and made himself look like an idiot*
*ego is too high to flat out admit that he WAS wrong*
*leaves a wtf video to try to change the subject*


EDIT:

Damn....

:-s

i feel i had a part in letting iGN know meta was banned in brawl....:-s

i've...been...trying to get rich interested in doing some articles on competitive smash a lot lately....

 

[Juushichi]

lol

http://youtu.be/lOBnvRIl_2k

To be quite honest, if Tearbear (and other MK's) plays like this at APEX I'd be very very interested to see how far he can get. No spite or anything, just curiosity. Also, I would love to see WC MK's vs EU Marth's and so on, so on. Actually, with Denti (I think) and the strong Olimar's that had surfaced since APEX 2010, I want to see how we do against the strong Japanese Oli's that come over.

Isn't Kakera confirmed? Not going to lie, I'd like to see him vs like Will (if he still plays), Pink Fresh and some matchups that he hasn't quite seen. US mid-tier mains seem to be particularly potent compared to what I've seen of other scenes (but I admittedly haven't seen a lot...) so these type of meetings are what I'm looking forward to.

This might be off topic though...

 

[Praxis]

i feel i had a part in letting iGN know meta was banned in brawl....:-s

i've...been...trying to get rich interested in doing some articles on competitive smash a lot lately....

I think a lot of people talked to Rich. He's been taking an interest.

 

[link2702]

eh, but i've been really pressuring him.....not gonna say what my ign account is....

but i've been making several posts on competitive smash, both to rich and on the boards.

some things i derped up a bit(yes i'll admit it) others i'm 100% positive i got correctly.

at the end of the day my goal was to at least get rid of some of the hate on the competitive scene...

 

[Praxis]

eh, but i've been really pressuring him.....not gonna say what my ign account is....

but i've been making several posts on competitive smash, both to rich and on the boards.

some things i derped up a bit(yes i'll admit it) others i'm 100% positive i got correctly.

at the end of the day my goal was to make everyone have an at least *somewhat* better view on competitive players.

I did it in person.

 

[link2702]

touché praxis

but not all of us have the money to do stuff like that

 

[Praxis]

touché praxis

but not all of us have the money to do stuff like that

Shoulda picked up Metaknight.

 

[Praxis]

Also, I'm pretty sure you're Captainkeeta125. Just guessing, though.

 

[link2702]

who? nope....that one isn't me...

 

[Mithost]

Shoulda picked up Metaknight.

Teach me Peach, I'll pay you 100 interwebs an hour.

 

[Ripple]

Teach me Peach, I'll pay you 100 interwebs an hour.

I'll do 101 interwebs Bob

 

[Conviction]

Question, where are the real anti-bans?

You know the ones with actual decent arguments? Sad to say that SMASHCHU is doing the best job atm.

 

[Krystedez]

Question, where are the real anti-bans?

You know the ones with actual decent arguments? Sad to say that SMASHCHU is doing the best job atm.

They all gave up.

 

[Conviction]

Sadface.


P-1 I see you lurking. When is GA's next tourney?

 

[Ripple]

pretty sure Omni was the only one who was actually intelligent about it and he just went with the flow

 

[Masky]

Sadface.


P-1 I see you lurking. When is GA's next tourney?

Excellent job mods, thread is 100% on track. I see two red names in the "Currently Viewing" box

 

[Ripple]

Excellent job mods, thread is 100% on track. I see two red names in the "Currently Viewing" box

posts like these don't contribute either, you could simply report it if you have a problem with it

 

[Omni]

I've been summoned.

What do you guys want?

 

[Alien Vision]

The Point That Goes Nowhere #1

Group A says: Group B's reasons aren't enough to ban MK.
Group B says: Group A's reasons aren't enough to legalize MK.

Neither of them are willing to lean over to the other side, while a few stand neutral..

The Point That Goes Nowhere #2

Group A says: *Insert walls of text* Opposing the opposite group's thesis.
Group B says: *Insert walls of text* Opposing the opposite group's thesis.

Neither of them are willing to take down their wall to see the other side, while a few stand neutral..​

Something doesn't add up. This looks like a behemoth of a double standard.

 

[~Tac~]

Looks like a classic Brawl thread + Internet.

 

[Kuro~]

I'm going to pick Sonic and homing attack to "Time people out" now.

Or do what MK did as Pit and fly under the stage on SV.

Clearly not as broken as MK.

Lol tommy...i'm kind of neutral about this whole thing either way...but just no...pit is nowhere near the level of mk on that...he has somethings that make it worse(like a way to stay near unpunishable for 30 seconds with one lg...at the risk of instant death) but he is way more punishable and your not as likely to die if you take a risk to go after him...

 

[Spelt]

Complaining that the discussion currently is off-topic is also, (durrr) off-topic.


There's a bunch of people in here trying to grasp at straws and cause commotion because obviously they know much better than the 75% of the community who voted for the ban.

It's pretty pointless.

 

[#HBC | Ryker]

All the Anti-Ban people I've seen are simply saying "He's not broken, the URC is just biased/uninformed/unqualified." But then they don't back up their information on why he's not broken.

 

[Alien Vision]

All the Anti-Ban people I've seen are simply saying "He's not broken, the URC is just biased/uninformed/unqualified." But then they don't back up their information on why he's not broken.

I believe both sides have their holes in this argument.

Both sides are bias as ****.

Both sides are making this harder than it needs to be.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

I'm anti-ban.

I just haven't really had the time to lay out my most pressing points and questions. I'm open to have my sentiments quashed if the data aligns. Still, I am not entirely comfortable with the methodology employed, and I would love if other members of the BBR (or even other high-level players) could add their insight.

Really, all I've been doing is damage control. It's aggravating to see some of the anti-banners just run off at the mouth without anything substantial to provide.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Ripple]

I'm anti-ban.

I just haven't really had the time to lay out my most pressing points and questions. I'm open to have my sentiments quashed if the data aligns. Still, I am not entirely comfortable with the methodology employed, and I would love if other members of the BBR (or even other high-level players) could add their insight.

insight on the ban, as in what some anti-banners are complaining about? like them being underqualified and the timing and such?

or am I misunderstanding?

 

[Omni]

insight on the ban, as in what some anti-banners are complaining about? like them being underqualified and the timing and such?

or am I misunderstanding?

If you really want to know what my inisght is this was my concern. I planned on posting the same concern here since the topic is still the same.

I, also, gather a group of TO's from across the continent (or perhaps the world) and we come to a conclusion/agreement/whatever that Metaknight should not be banned among other things. Now we have another ruleset from another group of TO's with opposing views. And this group has been established under the same grounds as the URC.

Easy, am'i'rite?

The main objective of the URC should be a global, uniformed ruleset. Period. If this is not your objective then I don't think the URC serves any purpose; not to mention the group name would be completely contradictory. However, the only thing you've succeeded to do is grab a few TO's with the similar mindset and a good amount of influence, and then prematurely came up with a grand decision that now based on 20-30% of upcoming tournaments will become the SWF/URC standard.

Your procedures are completely out of whack. If I, can in fact, copy your exact actions and create a ruleset with a different committee then something is wrong.

The step processes should have been this:
1.) Establish a form of government within the URC.
2.) Seek out ALL TO's from across the WORLD.
3.) Once an overwhelming majority of TO's have been placed in begin discussion.
4.) Methodically come to a census about on what a universal ruleset may look like.
5.) Release said ruleset to the public.

Instead, your step process was:
1.) Get TO's to join from some parts of US and Canada.
2.) Methodically come to a census about on what a universal ruleset may look like.
3.) Release said ruleset to the public.

The only reason why URC has any kind of pull is because JV has given you power. However, the power of the URC should be completely reflective of itself by itself.

You already know what I think of the result.

In my opinion, if you were truly seeking a uniformed global rule set you would reverse the Unity ruleset and go back to my Step 1.

I'm anti-ban for some part, but I honestly don't care. I've read enough from both arguments to see that both sides have very legitimate points. It falls down to a matter of opinion on how one wishes the metagame to be presented. And it also comes down to people's definitions of tidbits such as "healthy", "overcentralization", and "dominance".

My biggest issue is that people are turning a blind-eye to the actual procedure of the ban as opposed to the outcome. The fact that not a single person in the URC voted for Metaknight to remain unban speaks mountains yet, unfortunately, most people are simply content with the end result and thus ignore or even attempt to justify such a bias push.

That's just the half of it.