No, Jigglypuff hasn't. Meta Knight has won more Brawl tournaments than there has even BEEN Melee tournaments, since Brawls release.
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.
i want to sig one of these, but I cant decide which.
Really it was the pound ruleset that ingrained those rules in every single ruleset ever.
This reminds me off something I heard not to long ago. if a national does it, it sets a precedent and usually never gets changed back. see mute city in melee.
How much freakin' information do you guys have compiled anyway? Geez.
Enough to ban metaknight.
10 times better than every other character in the game to warrant a ban and currenty he isn't at mugen status.
others have noted the terrible-ness of this arguement.
but ill just say that based on results, hes already 3 times better than snake, the next highest placing character.
True, but they didn't say "we are banning metaknight at our individual tournies." I don't think anyone would have a problem.
Instead, they said "Metaknight is OFFICIALLY banned. Oh, and if you don't support our ruleset, we won't sticky your threads, good luck gaining attendence when we shun you from our community"
Which is a load of bull.
if your only issue is with the wording, and possible implications of said wording, than you dont have much of a leg to stand on.
as far as the sticky goes. all the staff has done is change the purpose of stickys. Instead of just 'biggest tourneys go here' its, 'heres a good reason for you to make things easy on yourself and use the same ruleset as everyone else.
if i want to go to a tourney, i never really care if something was stickeyed or not, id find it, but maybe that was just me.
1. The line on what should or should not be banned becomes extremely blurry when you start banning characters and tactics.
2. There are characters in other games that are as overpowered or more, and still have not received a ban.
3. Banning him because he wins over 50% of the tournies is not a good argument, nor is having no bad matchups, nor due to the fact that the majority of the community wants him banned.
4. As ******** as metaknight is, he doesn't omit the entire cast from the game like Akuma in ST or Ivan Ooze in MMPR.
1. Like the IDC? or Scrooging? or Planking? Or air camping?
...
2. Really, its entirely undefinable. But I like to see anyway. What character do you know of thats better than MK and was allowed, or worse than mk and was? because honestly, no, hes not taboo, he doesnt have full screen unblockable ohkos, but hes still right past the brink of banable in my book.
3. maybe not, but Id actually wager that all three of these things put together does make a good argument.
4. are you serious? Are you really saying that a character has to be as good as Ivan ooze to be banable?
There's never going to be a way to satisfy everybody with 1 ruleset. If he's banned, the anti-ban side gets upset. If not, the pro-ban side will be upset. There's no half-way here; all attempts at limiting MK so far have been either ridiculous or ineffective (as far as I know). The URC decided that satisfying the large majority was the right thing to do, and it makes sense.
TL;DR There will always be people that are unhappy with the ruleset, so everybody just stfu and play.
this
Just because the games are different doesn't mean we can't learn from them. The fighting game genre and community at large is a lot older than brawl. Doesn't mean we have to do everything their way, but it also doesn't mean we should just ignore everything that isn't brawl.
this statement can apply to you just as much as you try to apply it to somebody else.
Ban him...oh wait.
BAN...oh wait.