Meta Knight Officially Banned!

[popsofctown]

I don't think I've read a SWF post that was nothing but exclamations since I followed the Zelda boards years ago.

 

[da K.I.D.]

that's just plain disrespectful to ally, tyrant, nairo, atomsk, Anti, Dojo, Seibrik, and I guess Redhalberd,

Excluding the first one and the last one, it wouldnt be a surprise for any of the above people to lose to anybody else in said list.

 

[Alien Vision]

Ok, so out of all of these players. Who are at top level, like basically the top of the top?

@ Ripple.

 

[Vinylic.]

So yeah, Mk is banned.
There is not much to talk about anymore...

MUs and Tiers were already discussed.
Reasons why he's banned.
Vote counts, Charts, etc...

 

[Alien Vision]

So yeah, Mk is banned.
There not much to talk about anymore...

I'm willing to accept this.

(Regardless of still being suspicious of why the decision was made in the first place)

 

[Vyse]

Here's a point of view (abridged from an earlier post):

MK is bannable purely (and only) because of his problematic ledge play.

LGL should not exist.

Discuss the legitimacy of this statement. Winner gets an e-high five.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

the attendance rise cant last. Its a gimmick. It will drop to regular levels soon enough.

 

[~Tac~]

Here's a point of view (abridged from an earlier post):

MK is bannable purely (and only) because of his problematic ledge play.

LGL should not exist.

Discuss the legitimacy of this statement. Winner gets an e-high five.

This thread isn't worth an e-hi5.

fricken internet

Also. Protrollin' Vyse. Like a boss.

 

[popsofctown]

Here's a point of view (abridged from an earlier post):

MK is bannable purely (and only) because of his problematic ledge play.

LGL should not exist.

Discuss the legitimacy of this statement. Winner gets an e-high five.

That's what I wallposted in the pre-ban discussion.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=13414035&postcount=7952

No one cared.

But yeah, that's the best viewpoint, and it's why I'm rather upset with the global 50 count LGL that's in the MK banned ruleset.

 

[Vinylic.]

Here's a point of view (abridged from an earlier post):

MK is bannable purely (and only) because of his problematic ledge play.

LGL should not exist.

Discuss the legitimacy of this statement. Winner gets an e-high five.

All of it seems slightly agreeable in my point of view.

It's a deadlock for mk's ban to be lifted.

 

[Ripple]

@ Ripple.

all but redhalberd but he's getting more up there

 

[El Duderino]

Keep in mind that banning character/stages/items is "doing it our way" as is. The problem is, you're talking about a game unplayable outside of cheating. We do not need to use cheats in order to play this game. That's the key difference.

At what point does fixing a problem outweigh banning it and all other content that can break the game? In terms of the actual game, it always does. You can continue calling it cheating all you want, it still fixes big problems the rules have failed to successively work around. It's anti-hack vs pro-content.

Mind you, it was Sakurai who abandoned any hope of balance in Brawl. We didn't. We didn't make rules so they wouldn't be followed. When it comes to a fighting game community, they make rules no matter what.

All the more reason why we shouldn't be afraid to take further ownership of it.

Also, keep in mind that there's quite a lot of annoyance with updates as well, especially when they cost tons of money. If you don't have the correct version, you're screwed.

Which is exactly why updates should come once in a very great while so that scenario is less likely to happen. At the very least 6 months, preferably a year or more. As for the rest of your post, I have addressed it all earlier.

 

[WindMajor]

Here's a point of view (abridged from an earlier post):

MK is bannable purely (and only) because of his problematic ledge play.

LGL should not exist.

Discuss the legitimacy of this statement. Winner gets an e-high five.

I made a write-up with this same conclusion. If one is a believer that MK's planking warrants action to take place because it's too good, then one should be in favor of a ban, because every other alternative is flawed.

Can I get my e-high five?

 

[Vyse]

E-hi5s for everyone.

Like really, we all got past the need to make the game 'exciting' (a subjective and uncompetitive quality) as soon as MLG dropped us.

Planking has been researched and proven to only be universally problematic with MK (DMG's research).

Forget the other points. Whether having a character that breaks the counter pick system in the game is bad or not is subjective.

Focus on the most problematic part first - Planking. And screw the LGL. It sucks.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

At what point does fixing a problem outweigh banning it and all other content that can break the game? In terms of the actual game, it always does. You can continue calling it cheating all you want, it still fixes big problems the rules have failed to successively work around. It's anti-hack vs pro-content.

And banning a character fixes what the rules couldn't. You presume I hate hacking in general. But if you have to cheat to win, which by the way, this IS, there's something wrong.

All the more reason why we shouldn't be afraid to take further ownership of it.

We've done enough as is. Stop acting like we didn't do enough in the first place. By the way, placing a ban is "taking further ownership". Likewise, we don't actually own the system or games in that sense. We technically only have the right to play how we want to play it.

Which is exactly why updates should come once in a very great while. At the very least 6 months, preferably a year or more. As for the rest of your post, I have addressed it all earlier.

The TO's have better things to do than make more hacks to keep the minority happy. Or maybe they don't promote hacks? Have you noticed how none of them have even bothered to address your "hacking" idea more than once(where they said NO)? Why is that, I wonder? I'm honestly curious. I think it's because they do not consider hacking fair play. Nor do I. Meta Knight didn't promote fair play either. If you wanted fair play, we would not be banning any characters, but perhaps certain stages, items, and universal techniques.(basically, if only one character can do something broken, we'd allow it, but if the whole cast can(or a good chunk)..., take it out)

I am serious, though. I'd like the TO's to speak up on this issue. And yes, I've organized tournaments myself, albeit, not on a grand scale, so I can atleast speak as one in this case. Likewise, so far, all the people who ever has played under my tournament abhore cheat devices and do not consider it fair by any means. And before you twist my words around saying banning a character isn't fair, let's also note that we shouldn't have to do that by any means. I don't like it any more than you do, but I do agree with it.(no, this isn't an ironic statement. You see, agreement is understanding of something, not whether you like it or not)

 

[Vinylic.]

What if there was no ledge grab limit?

 

[Anthon1996]

http://wii.ign.com/articles/119/1197901p1.html

Cool to see IGN reporting on competitive Smash.

 

[Sleek Media]

This thread provides me with a never ending supply of MK player tears.

It is therefore the greatest thread ever on Smashboards.

 

[El Duderino]

And banning a character fixes what the rules couldn't. You presume I hate hacking in general. But if you have to cheat to win, which by the way, this IS, there's something wrong.

I said successfully fixed, banning a character should never be viewed as a proper solution. Only when all other options are exhausted should it be considered a necessary but unfortunate reality. Unfortunate because you have to screw over players in the process. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

We've done enough as is. Stop acting like we didn't do enough in the first place. By the way, placing a ban is "taking further ownership". Likewise, we don't actually own the system or games in that sense. We technically only have the right to play how we want to play it.

What are you talking about? I completely commend the effort, just while recognizing there are certain flaws with the Brawl that are out of hand.

The TO's have better things to do than make more hacks to keep the minority happy. Or maybe they don't promote hacks? Have you noticed how none of them have even bothered to address your "hacking" idea? Why is that, I wonder? I'm honestly curious. I think it's because they do not consider hacking fair play. Nor do I. Meta Knight didn't promote fair play either. If you wanted fair play, we would not be banning any characters, but perhaps certain stages, items, and universal techniques.(basically, if only one character can do something broken, we'd allow it, but if the whole cast can(or a good chunk)..., take it out)

I am serious, though. I'd like the TO's to speak up on this issue. And yes, I've organized tournaments myself, albeit, not on a grand scale, so I can atleast speak as one in this case. Likewise, so far, all the people who ever has played under my tournament abhore cheat devices and do not consider it fair by any means. And before you twist my words around saying banning a character isn't fair, let's also note that we shouldn't have to do that by any means. I don't like it any more than you do, but I do agree with it.(no, this isn't an ironic statement. You see, agreement is understanding of something, not whether you like it or not)

There is a big smash community outside of TOs, not everything has to rest on their shoulders. Also I never said it would be easy. It would take a respected community member making a strong case for it that people could get behind. It also is going to take increased player frustration with the current rule-set and setbacks in Brawl that could be fixed. That is clearly already going on. Now may not be the right time for it, but you can bet this topic is not going anywhere and for good reason.

 

[krazyzyko]

This makes me wonder if there should be certain nerfs in the Brawl hacks to legalize MK...

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

I said successfully fixed, banning a character should never be viewed as a proper solution. Only when all other options are exhausted should it be considered a necessary but unfortunate reality. Unfortunate because you have to screw over players in the process.

And forcing players to play with hacks doesn't screw anyone over? You keep saying everybody can do it, but we both know that's a huge lie. And yes, they're just as bannable as anything. Don't act like Meta Knight can't be banned at all. If you're saying shouldn't, I understand why you would think that, but he's not exempt from being cut like items or stages. He's another part of the game that can be chosen to be banned too. He's not any more special, after all.

What are you talking about? I completely commend the effort, just while recognizing there are certain flaws with the Brawl that are out of hand.

The thing that was out of hand specifically was Meta Knight. That was dealt with by banning. As I said, the only real complainable thing beyond him is Tripping. That's the only reason anybody wouldn't mind going to a tourney that uses hacks. They can simply only add that, and the game would be more skillful by taking out luck. However, this is not needed either. Tripping can be beneficial because you can also dodge things. So it has its uses.

There is a big smash community outside of TOs, not everything has to rest on their shoulders. Also I never said it would be easy. It would take a respected community member making a strong case for it that people could get behind. It also is going to take increased player frustration with the current rule-set and setbacks in Brawl that could be fixed. That is clearly already going on. Now may not be the right time for it, but you can bet this topic is not going anywhere.

There-in lies the problem. You've been trying to convince the TO's to use Balanced Brawl, when they already said no. Also, once again, only the minority is butthurt over this. You should honestly try to run Balanced Brawl tournaments. I do hope you get a good turnout. But the TO's are doing nothing wrong either by running the tournaments within the original parameters of the game.

 

[Mic_128]

I said successfully fixed, banning a character should never be viewed as a proper solution. Only when all other options are exhausted should it be considered a necessary but unfortunate reality.

Welcome to the unfortunate reality. We've pretty much exhausted all other options.

 

[John12346]

Okay, so I’m just gonna take a wild guess at what the existing pro-ban standpoint is. Defo. would like some revision and proofreading by some other pro-ban guys, but I’m just gonna take a stab at this.
.
.
.
Meta Knight:
- Has moves and abilities that far eclipse what the rest of the cast has to offer, such as long ranged, fast, powerful, and disjointed attacks, a flawless recovery, the ability to bring lots of matches to time, a special move that turns him into a large mass of glitchy priority, and a load of moves that link into each other and are generally safe on hit or whiff.

- Is directly nerfed by the current ruleset, via the blatantly lowered ledge grab limit. In addition to this, multiple other rules have been suggested to further weaken him, such as restriction of the stagelist, and an air time limit, among many others, suggesting that he is far too powerful for Brawl under normal, unrestricted gameplay.

- Wins a ridiculous amount of money from tournaments in relative comparison to the rest of the cast. MK has won 46.09% of all tournament money in 2011, for example, where Diddy has only won 10.06%, and Snake has only won 16.28%(Note: These percentages get drastically lower as you further descend the Tier List). MK has won 197 different people money, while Diddy and Snake have only won 49 and 80 different people money, respectively.

- Completely breaks the Counterpick System, by having no bad matchups whatsoever, and arguably no even matchups either. Has no bad stages outside of Final Destination, which will always be stricken and banned. Certain stages cannot be counterpicked reliably due to his existence, and he essentially has an auto-win on his counterpick; through utilization of the deadly Brinstar/Rainbow Cruise combination.

- Roughly 3/4 of the community want him banned. An estimated 70% of the Top 100 National players are pro-ban(according to Delux's research). It's also POSSIBLE, that even the BBR is for the ban(Apparently, the BBR had some discussions on MK, and their results were given to the URC, and considering MK got banned in the end… although I can’t say for sure, as the discussions themselves were never made public… some kind of confirmation for this one would be nice.).
.
.
.
While each individual point actually IS no real cause for concern, because there can be many different underlying causes to each one, and a single point can likely be worked around, the problem is when ONE character possesses ALL of the qualities listed above, because that probably is a problem.

Now, I ultimately believe the pro-ban argument is that, given everything stated above, using Meta Knight does not fall within the subset of skills that we wish to test in this game. Of course, anti-ban would feel that the above is not enough to draw the same conclusion, but to each his own, I guess.

So... I know a lot of stuff here is stuff we already know, but I wanted to put it all on the table, so there we have it. Thoughts?

 

[Shadic]

Welcome to the unfortunate reality. We've pretty much exhausted all other options.

Lebowski's other proposed option was Balanced Brawl.

 

[WindMajor]

That wouldn't be saving Brawl, that would be replacing it.

 

[Mic_128]

Lebowski's other proposed option was Balanced Brawl.

Hacking does nothing but open up a stupidly massive can of worms, creating even more problems than ever. You thought pro/anti-ban MK debates were bad? Lets open up nerf/buff debates for every character.

Not to mention the logistics "Oh you've got BBrawl 1.42? I thought it was for BBrawl 1.43" "No man, that one's ****" and then you've also got "something glitchy just happened that gave you an advantage. Is that a prt of normal brawl, a bug or did you intentionally change the codes to let you do that on command?"

Hacking is not an answer.

 

[ElDominio]

To all people saying Brawl isn't meant to be played in tournaments:

[collapse=Giant image warning]

[/collapse]

Can we please inform ourselves? PLEASE?

 

[Strong Badam]

Welcome to the unfortunate reality. We've pretty much exhausted all other options.

stage list is much too expansive to say that at present time.

 

[WindMajor]

To all people saying Brawl isn't meant to be played in tournaments:

Did everybody forget about Tournament mode too?

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

For all the people saying Brawl was meant for tournies:

But this of course has little to do with Metaknight being banned.

 

[ElDominio]

For all the people saying Brawl was meant for tournies:

But this of course has little to do with Metaknight being banned.

Sadly, tripping is not defined as the act of making a game unfit for tournament play.

Nice try though.

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

Sadly, tripping is not defined as the act of making a game unfit for tournament play.

Nice try though.

Completely random punishment for trying to move doesn't count as an anti-competitive mechanic unfit for tournament play?

My mistake. I am clearly in the wrong on this.

 

[ElDominio]

Completely random punishment for trying to move doesn't count as an anti-competitive mechanic unfit for tournament play?

My mistake. I am clearly in the wrong on this.

Is it a punishment? How much percent do you lose of a trip?
Do you lose a stock?
Does a flower magically appear on your head?
Does the opponent get a starman?

Since when is being in a forced getup position (with a few invincibility frames to boot) a bad thing?

 

[LKratos]

Since when is being in a forced getup position (with a few invincibility frames to boot) a bad thing?

When you're tech-chasing an Ike into a KO sequence but instead you trip so he one-shots you.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Completely random punishment for trying to move doesn't count as an anti-competitive mechanic unfit for tournament play?

My mistake. I am clearly in the wrong on this.

Other than it being annoying and simply just a luck factor, it doesn't overall damage the gameplay by any large margin.

You have just as much luck as your hand cramping. This just happens a bit more often.(also the main reason why I think pausing should be on. You had to use the bathroom, you got a cramp, etc.) I get it could be abused, though.

 

[Vyse]

Completely random punishment for trying to move doesn't count as an anti-competitive mechanic unfit for tournament play?

My mistake. I am clearly in the wrong on this.

Bomb-ombs, stitch faces, 9 hammers, gordos, misfires.

Although I concede the point of it being indicative of authorial intent - I'd argue its relevance after the game leaves the author's hands.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

Is it a punishment? How much percent do you lose of a trip?
Do you lose a stock?
Does a flower magically appear on your head?
Does the opponent get a starman?

Since when is being in a forced getup position (with a few invincibility frames to boot) a bad thing?

Possibly. You are vulnerable for about 10 frames or so, afterall. Then for a few more after your get up attack. There's these things called tech chases that work on a fairly similar concept.

Do they have to? Is that what it would take for you to call the mechanic anti-competitive? Really?

Because you have no control over when it happens other than simply avoiding dashing altogether. The fact that it could potentially cost you a match is still there, no matter how slim.

I honestly can't believe anyone would argue that tripping is a completely reasonable mechanic. Especially in a thread that has nothing to do with tripping.

 

[BarDulL]

Tripping is anti-competitive, but it doesn't make Brawl a non-competitive game.

Move along now XD

 

[Anthon1996]

To all people saying Brawl isn't meant to be played in tournaments:


Can we please inform ourselves? PLEASE?

Don't forget about being able to set it so the loser picks the next stage.

 

[Vyse]

Also re tripping:

Competitive Trading Card Games.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk