Metaknight Handicap

[Undrdog]

Now before I say anything else allow me to stress that this is thread is in no way affiliated with the SBR or anyone in it apart from myself.

I'm curious how everyone here feels about Metaknight having a handicap during tournaments of, let's say, 30%. I haven't had time to test the percentages so I'm just tossing 30% up in the air.

In Brawl handicaps as far as I'm aware only alter the base percentage each character begins with. By setting Metaknight's handicap up a bit it would make his largest (and quite possibly only) weakness Metaknight gets to keep his play-style and be completely free from ever being banned.

This option would be easily altered without changing the evolution of the character. Say in time we realize that Metaknight isn't actually in a league of his own. Since Metaknight was never banned and since none of his moves were banned the evolution of the character during this time.

So tell me what you think. I'm just curious because to be honest you all know more about Metaknight then I do. What I'd like to know...

1) Do you think this would change the evolution of the character?
2) Is this better in your mind then a ban on his moves or the character himself?
3) Would you still play Metaknight?
4) Percentage used for handicap?
5) Any concerns about this idea that I might not've realized.


Again I'm not a mod or anything, and I realize how "formal" this thread seems. Please treat this thread like you would any other. I'm not trying to sound uppity or anything. lol
​

 

[Deoxys]

It would be disappointing, but I would still play MK and would prefer it to a ban. I would certainly have to think about playing other characters, though.

 

[grandmaster192]

I don't like this idea at all. I would still use MK because that's who I like, but it's not fair at all.

 

[BentoBox]

Define fair.

 

[Ceph]

Sounds reasonable. That's an interesting idea; I'd sooner test that than a ban. I kinda feel bad for the ppl who play MK, but if you've got l33t skillz, why should a handicap matter? I don't know about an exact percentage, but 30% should work.

 

[8AngeL8]

I actually like this idea. It would have to be tested in just a couple of tourneys for a while to see what the ramifications are, though.

 

[Mew2King]

LMFAO @ 30%, anyone who agrees with this does not play brawl competitively at all and know what they are talking about

10% is more than enough, that's still 30% every game. Snake already goes even or beats MK as is, now it's just ********. Even top snake players like Greg will agree with me on this.

having 30% a game is basically a ban, there is no reason to ever use him over another character

 

[bludhoundz]

You could just say that MK has to play with one less life than his opponent.

30% for 3 stocks is a total of 90%. That's basically a free stock's worth of damage.

I think 10-15% is more reasonable. 30-45% advantage per game.

I don't really think this is a great idea, but that's just me personally. I'd rather play a harder match, even if that means I'm going to lose more.

 

[Denzi]

You could just say that MK has to play with one less life than his opponent.

30% for 3 stocks is a total of 90%. That's basically a free stock's worth of damage.

I think 10-15% is more reasonable. 30-45% advantage per game.

I don't really think this is a great idea, but that's just me personally. I'd rather play a harder match, even if that means I'm going to lose more.

I agree. on your percentages. And they're not saying that it is a good idea, just a better idea than an all-out ban

 

[ADHD]

It would need to be tested first but handicaps may be the only true way to balance the game and make up for what the creators could not do themselves.

 

[Nic64]

I think this is really silly, people need to decide whether they want him banned or not, any handicap is going to either be

A) not enough to satiate people who whine about MK

B) go too far and make MK uncompetitive

people overstate his dominance too much IMO, he has good matchups across the board but he has more even matchups than most give him credit for, his biggest attraction to me is simply not having bad matchups, it doesn't mean he has a free **** hammer on everyone

EDIT:

handicaps may be the only true way to balance the game and make up for what the creators could not do themselves.

nerf MK and the game is still unbalanced as hell, this is a really bad way of looking at it. taking MK out isn't suddenly going to elevate the entire lower tier or anything, the characters that are bad are largely considered so because they get owned by many characters, not one. and if the implication is to start handicapping everyone, then LOFL

 

[ADHD]

I think this is really silly, people need to decide whether they want him banned or not, any handicap is going to either be

A) not enough to satiate people who whine about MK

B) go too far and make MK uncompetitive

people overstate his dominance too much IMO, he has good matchups across the board but he has more even matchups than most give him credit for, his biggest attraction to me is simply not having bad matchups, it doesn't mean he has a free **** hammer on everyone

EDIT:



nerf MK and the game is still unbalanced as hell, this is a really bad way of looking at it. taking MK out isn't suddenly going to elevate the entire lower tier or anything, the characters that are bad are largely considered so because they get owned by many characters, not one. and if the implication is to start handicapping everyone, then LOFL

not just mk, its a longshot

 

[Nic64]

any attempt to balance the game through handicapping is futile and will have hilariously bad results, I don't think many people would support handicapping on a mass level, and I think the few who support doing it to MK are just trying to avoid a widespread ban that is IMO unlikely anyway

 

[8AngeL8]

Well, what's the solution, then? Leaving the game as is, and everyone falls into two camps: 1. MK players and 2: MK counters. The fact that EVERYTHING in the meta-game is revolving around meta-knight bothers me. With 39 playable characters, I'd hope there would be more viable characters than that. Sure, you can pick Falco or Game and Watch and still do decently, but you know when you pick them that you're putting yourself at a disadvantage.

So, is that situation desirable? Or do we want to change it? If so, how would we change it other than an all-out ban? A small handicap (Yeah, 30 is probably too much), seems better than just outright banning him.

 

[Nic64]

idk as though there is a reasonable solution, the game was poorly designed in many ways and there's really nothing we can do to change that, and many of the things we would try could make it worse. I still think MK's even or near even matchups make him undeserving of our meddling but it doesn't really matter, whatever is going to happen is going to happen, I don't think anyone is going to be swayed at this point from whatever their current judgement is on the matter

 

[Jimbo_G]

This actually sounds like a wonderful idea to me. Not the best, but most definitely the best solution I've heard since Meta Knight got on his high horse. Doing something like this will most certainly drag him out of his high tier and give MANY characters a much more even match against him.

I agree completely with 8AngeL8 that Brawl's competitive life is completely revolving around Meta Knight right now. If something drastic isn't done to get him out of his God Tier, then the large majority of Brawl's roster is going to be completely obsolete.

You can argue that Meta Knight has SLIGHT trouble with a few tactics and a handful of characters have a few tricks that mess him up, but he still has NO TRUE COUNTER. He still out-classes all other characters, while every other character in the game has some major weakness or a few characters they really have a hard time with. Giving him a 30% handicap (which I think is a fair percentage, anything lower is too negligible) will certainly rip him out of his God Tier and give him a good handful of characters that he'll have a lot of trouble against, finally giving him some true counter-picks and leaving the door open for other characters without hindering Meta Knight's playstyle.

 

[brinboy789]

i dont agree with the handicap idea...and even if i did, 30% is way too much. 30x3 = 90%, which is pretty much a stock with MK's survivability

 

[Nic64]

This actually sounds like a wonderful idea to me. Not the best, but most definitely the best solution I've heard since Meta Knight got on his high horse.

****, he's only been "on his high horse" for a few months, the game hasn't even been out a year. it's way too soon to assume that he is infallible(he isn't)

Doing something like this will most certainly drag him out of his high tier and give MANY characters a much more even match against him.

it will not however, make those characters tourney viable, as most of the cast still have a lot of bad matchups. knock MK into mid tier and it doesn't make the rest of mid tier more competitive.

I agree completely with 8AngeL8 that Brawl's competitive life is completely revolving around Meta Knight right now. If something drastic isn't done to get him out of his God Tier, then the large majority of Brawl's roster is going to be completely obsolete.

again, game has only been out what, 8 months? MK has been reputed as the best character for what, 3-4 months maybe? way too early for drastic measures

Giving him a 30% handicap (which I think is a fair percentage, anything lower is too negligible)

30% amounts to 90% of damage that the other player never has to work for at all, that's essentially a whole stock, many characters can KO MK at 90%. or you can think of the other player needing to deal only 60-70% damage maybe before they can KO on each stock. totally unreasonable, you're not talking about balance at this point, you're talking about a Ness sized nerf.

 

[Dojo]

I agree completely with 8AngeL8 that Brawl's competitive life is completely revolving around Meta Knight right now.

RIGHT NOW. It's revolving around him RIGHT NOW.

Any theories about the entire metagame revolving around MK dittos only in the future are obsolete. Not the other matchups.

Nobody knows for sure what's going to happen, so people need to stop throwing all that bull out there and stay patient.


The reason mk's are at the top...
The TOP of the TOP players use them.

-M2K could still go D3 and **** any other MK around. I promise you. Why? He's ****ing M2K.

-Azen's Lucario outdoes any other MK around minus M2K. Why? Not because M2K is playing MK, but because he's the BEST around. Always has been.

-Now you still see a guy like Chudat competing very strongly with the TOP MK's. WITH KIRBY.

-DSF who plays Snake. Does very strong against all MK's minus M2K. Why? Because he's ****ing M2K. I promise you he can outdo 98% of all the MK's there are.


Now let's go to a little less professional level. Let's go to a strong competitive level.

You see players like Lee, Stiltz and myself using MK. We're top players at our level.
But we can still be beaten.

-RoyR a MARTH took me out at HOBO 11. DMG a WARIO takes me to some amazingly close sets.
-Stiltz has been beaten by players like Sethlon and Roy as well. Falcos and Marths.
- Lee Martin although I'm not quite to sure about who's beaten IS beatable at our level. I guarantee you RoyR would give him a run for his money.

People learn the matchup very well folks and they utilize it to the very best of their abilities.


At a lower level of competitive play.

The reason MK stays at the top of this is because these people don't know how to fight this matchup. MK IS in fact the best player in this game. He's not hard to pick up and can get you into this competitive scene. And that makes it hard for the other players at this level to compete. Thus MK's stay up top of this part of play.


It's understandable that MK is the best character in this game. But guys he can be beaten. It's been done already by plenty of people. It's been proven and it will continue to be proven time and time again. It's difficult as hell to win this matchup. But instead of whining and continuously trying to get him banned, better yourself as a player and improve your playing ability.

This game is a competitive game. The common goal should be to better yourself to overcome all obstacles. No matter how difficult they may be. I understand it's unfair to work much harder to do that. So for that I give MAD PROPS to those players who work their hardest and beat those of us that do main MK.

 

[Jimbo_G]

I don't really understand the concept of adding each individual 30% as an argument. Obviously they don't all take effect at once. To say it sacrifices him a whole stock makes no sense. You have to work your way up past each individual handicap. The individual percentages have nothing to do with each other.

The handicap that's being proposed is like saying in a 3 out of 5 fencing duel instead of getting a full-length sword you get 3 swords that are 1/3 shorter for each round. However, with the combination theory, you instead get a sword with no blade once, and then 2 swords of full length. The latter situation is NOT how the handicap will be applied.

 

[grandmaster192]

Ban the character or don't ban the character.

Putting a handicap on him just makes him worthless. IMO this just seems like a way for SBR to avoid having to make the desicion to ban him or not.

You're not going to please everyone. Just ban him or don't ban him.

 

[Heroes_Never_Die]

Please, MK will still own all the noobs and make them cry even harder than they are.

But srsly, either ban him or don't; handicaps are pathetic.

 

[ProBrawler]

Lol, as a Ike beta-mainer, I'd love this. From the start of the match I'll only need to get in one Fsmash for a KO. =^_^= So yeah, it's an idea but idk about the long-term viability of it.

 

[Nic64]

I don't really understand the concept of adding each individual 30% as an argument. Obviously they don't all take effect at once. To say it sacrifices him a whole stock makes no sense. You have to work your way up past each individual handicap. The individual percentages have nothing to do with each other.

because cumulatively, MK is handicapped 90%? in all honesty the fact that it's broken up in between stocks might even be worse for many players on a psychological level, not that it's relevant to how his matchups are impacted. anyway I've said what I have to say, I agree with the notion that MK should be banned or not banned, personally I think not banned, but if you want him out of the competitive scene just do it right and ban. it's silly anyway though, MK is not infallible and he's not even close, this discussion exists only because people want something to whine about. yes he's the best character, every fighting game has one, doesn't mean other characters can't compete with him.

 

[Plum]

I picture it this way. Let's say the match is MK vs Falco. If MK is handicapped 30% at each stock, it's like Falco just got off his CG without any work or punishment. He didn't have to risk getting punished for trying to get a grab in each stock.

Let's say we go with 10 or 15%. That is like one or two free hits. Not a big enough difference to hurt, but does that really do anything? In my opinion that really isn't going to make a difference in the outcome where as 30 is just going too high.

Though I can see this being a good idea in theory I don't think it can work out.

But how can you say Meta Knight is the best character in the game period? Go through the history of the game and there has been several best characters in the game.

Why don't we see everyone shouting out to ban the Ice Climbers when they can zero death EVERY character in the game? The current metagame is centered around MK, no doubt but give it time and counters will come up. That is how fighting games work.

Style A is created, and dominates the scene. Style B is developed to counter Style A. Style C comes to combat Style B. It is a cycle of gameplay that will continue to happen until the game is at its full maturity, and even then it has the potential to change again. Let's say down the road we have Style F. Turns out Style F is countered by Style B which comes back into play.

To ban MK really wouldn't open up viable characters. I'm too lazy to check out every matchup thread out there, but I can bet that if a character had troubles with MK they also have troubles with the other top tiers. And to anybody who supports a straight out ban, go and read Sirlin, then come back and argue.

 

[Deoxys]

LMFAO @ 30%, anyone who agrees with this does not play brawl competitively at all and know what they are talking about

10% is more than enough, that's still 30% every game. Snake already goes even or beats MK as is, now it's just ********. Even top snake players like Greg will agree with me on this.

having 30% a game is basically a ban, there is no reason to ever use him over another character

Yeah, I was going to say this but you did it for me... I'd still play MK though, just because I like him that much and want to get better and would know that such a ridiculous handicap would be revoked soon after.

Anyway, I think this would be vastly superior to banning MK, but still would be lame. Also I'd think this rule would only apply to singles.

Let's say we go with 10 or 15%. That is like one or two free hits. Not a big enough difference to hurt, but does that really do anything? In my opinion that really isn't going to make a difference in the outcome where as 30 is just going too high.

[...]

But how can you say Meta Knight is the best character in the game period? Go through the history of the game and there has been several best characters in the game.

[...]

Style A is created, and dominates the scene. Style B is developed to counter Style A. Style C comes to combat Style B. It is a cycle of gameplay that will continue to happen until the game is at its full maturity, and even then it has the potential to change again. Let's say down the road we have Style F. Turns out Style F is countered by Style B which comes back into play.

To ban MK really wouldn't open up viable characters. [....]

In response to your first paragraph I quoted, every single % is a difference enough to hurt. Secondly, you can't have 15% handicap, it goes in 10% intervals. Otherwise, I would propose a 5% handicap.

In response to the rest of what I quoted, you can say MK is the best character in the game period because he has NO BAD MATCHUPS in the current metagame. Once this metagame is fully developed, if no one has appeared who is favorable against MK, every person interested in winning should logically main him. Yes, fighting games should have a Rock-Paper-Scissors kind of metagame, but at the current state Brawl is in, such a thing doesn't exist, because there is nothing that is favorable against metaknight. Once such a thing appears, banning him will be out of the question. If such a thing never appears and the metagame has fully developed, MK must be banned, and his ban would make other characters viable mains, because MK would be THE ONLY logical main.



That said, I think the best option, aside from waiting, would be to let the non-MK player simply choose the starter stage.

 

[Nic64]

such a thing doesn't exist, because there is nothing that is favorable against metaknight

this is somewhat debatable, no one hard counters MK, but he has matchups that are even, which is enough IMO

he has NO BAD MATCHUPS in the current metagame

true but it hasn't been this way long enough for ban talk to be floated around so carelessly, the fact that this is being discussed at this point is just ridiculous. maybe in the end MK will be deserving of a ban, but it's really not something that should be decided less than a year after the game has been out and maybe a few months after the character in question was deemed to have no bad matchups.

Once this metagame is fully developed, if no one has appeared who is favorable against MK, every person interested in winning should logically main him.

not necessarily, if he still has even matchups, and those characters still have good matchups across the board as they do, then they are perfectly logical mains. yes, unlike the MK player, these people will need to be good with at least one other character to cover their weak spots, but that's not so bad...and not everyone will necessarily play best with MK, I know it's that way for me. I know MK is the best character and I play him a lot, I'm still better with snake and lucario...maybe even a few others. MK being the best character does not mean picking him gives you the best chance to win, you still have to play well, and if you play better as other characters, there's a good chance that picking them will serve you better

That said, I think the best option, aside from waiting, would be to let the non-MK player simply choose the starter stage.

this is an interesting suggestion...idk if I agree with it but it sounds much better than a handicap(and I agree on waiting)

 

[Pierce7d]

Handicap != worse.

For example, vs MK, Marth can Fthrow to Fsmash for anywhere from 18-25 damage (and if MK's DI is bad, I can do it twice for over 30 damage). Not only does this result in MORE damage, but it also puts MK in a more pleasing position.

With a 10% handicap, or even a 20% handicap, this is no longer possible. This makes him slightly BETTER against Marth.

As already stated, 30% is virtually a ban.

EDIT: I see someone used the Falco example above me. But guess what? Now Falco can't do many of the things that he could do out of the chaingrab. He can't chainthrow to Dair spike from the middle of FD anymore. He might not be able to incur as much damage with chainthrow to gatling combo. You mess around with the diminishing returns of the moves, and make some initial 0% combos not work.

 

[chaos_]

the idea sucks

 

[aeghrur]

Hmmm, choosing the starter stage idea is very interesting. I think that could work. =O

 

[ToxicWaltz]

RIGHT NOW. It's revolving around him RIGHT NOW.

Any theories about the entire metagame revolving around MK dittos only in the future are obsolete. Not the other matchups.

Nobody knows for sure what's going to happen, so people need to stop throwing all that bull out there and stay patient.


The reason mk's are at the top...
The TOP of the TOP players use them.

-M2K could still go D3 and **** any other MK around. I promise you. Why? He's ****ing M2K.

-Azen's Lucario outdoes any other MK around minus M2K. Why? Not because M2K is playing MK, but because he's the BEST around. Always has been.

-Now you still see a guy like Chudat competing very strongly with the TOP MK's. WITH KIRBY.

-DSF who plays Snake. Does very strong against all MK's minus M2K. Why? Because he's ****ing M2K. I promise you he can outdo 98% of all the MK's there are.


Now let's go to a little less professional level. Let's go to a strong competitive level.

You see players like Lee, Stiltz and myself using MK. We're top players at our level.
But we can still be beaten.

-RoyR a MARTH took me out at HOBO 11. DMG a WARIO takes me to some amazingly close sets.
-Stiltz has been beaten by players like Sethlon and Roy as well. Falcos and Marths.
- Lee Martin although I'm not quite to sure about who's beaten IS beatable at our level. I guarantee you RoyR would give him a run for his money.

People learn the matchup very well folks and they utilize it to the very best of their abilities.


At a lower level of competitive play.

The reason MK stays at the top of this is because these people don't know how to fight this matchup. MK IS in fact the best player in this game. He's not hard to pick up and can get you into this competitive scene. And that makes it hard for the other players at this level to compete. Thus MK's stay up top of this part of play.


It's understandable that MK is the best character in this game. But guys he can be beaten. It's been done already by plenty of people. It's been proven and it will continue to be proven time and time again. It's difficult as hell to win this matchup. But instead of whining and continuously trying to get him banned, better yourself as a player and improve your playing ability.

This game is a competitive game. The common goal should be to better yourself to overcome all obstacles. No matter how difficult they may be. I understand it's unfair to work much harder to do that. So for that I give MAD PROPS to those players who work their hardest and beat those of us that do main MK.

Yes but notice how you're naming ALL top players. In turnies when they're not there.. who wins? MK. Because he needs a nurf 30% isn't too much.. because a good bit of the time MK only takes 15-20% before he takes a stock.

 

[Dojo]

Notice how I said AT LOWER LEVELS OF COMPETITIVE PLAY and continue to explain why MK still wins. This is why YOU IMPROVE and BECOME A TOP PLAYER.

 

[Overswarm]

RIGHT NOW. It's revolving around him RIGHT NOW.

Any theories about the entire metagame revolving around MK dittos only in the future are obsolete. Not the other matchups.

Nobody knows for sure what's going to happen, so people need to stop throwing all that bull out there and stay patient.


The reason mk's are at the top...
The TOP of the TOP players use them.

-M2K could still go D3 and **** any other MK around. I promise you. Why? He's ****ing M2K.

-Azen's Lucario outdoes any other MK around minus M2K. Why? Not because M2K is playing MK, but because he's the BEST around. Always has been.

-Now you still see a guy like Chudat competing very strongly with the TOP MK's. WITH KIRBY.

-DSF who plays Snake. Does very strong against all MK's minus M2K. Why? Because he's ****ing M2K. I promise you he can outdo 98% of all the MK's there are.


Now let's go to a little less professional level. Let's go to a strong competitive level.

You see players like Lee, Stiltz and myself using MK. We're top players at our level.
But we can still be beaten.

-RoyR a MARTH took me out at HOBO 11. DMG a WARIO takes me to some amazingly close sets.
-Stiltz has been beaten by players like Sethlon and Roy as well. Falcos and Marths.
- Lee Martin although I'm not quite to sure about who's beaten IS beatable at our level. I guarantee you RoyR would give him a run for his money.

People learn the matchup very well folks and they utilize it to the very best of their abilities.


At a lower level of competitive play.

The reason MK stays at the top of this is because these people don't know how to fight this matchup. MK IS in fact the best player in this game. He's not hard to pick up and can get you into this competitive scene. And that makes it hard for the other players at this level to compete. Thus MK's stay up top of this part of play.


It's understandable that MK is the best character in this game. But guys he can be beaten. It's been done already by plenty of people. It's been proven and it will continue to be proven time and time again. It's difficult as hell to win this matchup. But instead of whining and continuously trying to get him banned, better yourself as a player and improve your playing ability.

This game is a competitive game. The common goal should be to better yourself to overcome all obstacles. No matter how difficult they may be. I understand it's unfair to work much harder to do that. So for that I give MAD PROPS to those players who work their hardest and beat those of us that do main MK.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pay4vxdISi8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNwuFkLuvak
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mUthU_qpQY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPsFcG12VDo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtBPV2li8G4


Your character is broken. Deal.

 

[Dojo]

That bull has already been brought up.

Azen himself already stated that Lee is the only MK he's ever had to switch to MK to, in order to do better. He said he does better with lucario against every other MK he plays.

 

[Overswarm]

That bull has already been brought up.

Azen himself already stated that Lee is the only MK he's ever had to switch to MK to, in order to do better. He said he does better with lucario against every other MK he plays.

Now hold on a minute.

You're saying everyone should stop complaining about MK because elite players like Azen, M2K, and DSF, who have been playing competitive smash for nearly a decade, can beat good Metaknights (let's just ignore the fact that ALL THREE OF THEM PLAY METAKNIGHT IN TOURNAMENT).

But now I bring up Lee, a new face to the "top player" scene, BEATING Azen's Lucario with MK until Azen switches to MK and dominates him... and you say "it's just a fluke"?

I say Azen, M2K, and DSF are the fluke then.

Your move.

 

[Blad01]

I don't really like the idea... Or we ban MK, or we don't ban him. A handicap would be not satisfiying at all (After that, some people will say that Snake needs a 10% handicap, then G&W maybe...)

 

[Dojo]

Now hold on a minute.

You're saying everyone should stop complaining about MK because elite players like Azen, M2K, and DSF, who have been playing competitive smash for nearly a decade, can beat good Metaknights (let's just ignore the fact that ALL THREE OF THEM PLAY METAKNIGHT IN TOURNAMENT).

But now I bring up Lee, a new face to the "top player" scene, BEATING Azen's Lucario with MK until Azen switches to MK and dominates him... and you say "it's just a fluke"?

I say Azen, M2K, and DSF are the fluke then.

Your move.

No, I said there's people at high levels of play (not necessary elite) that take over Metaknights that play at a the same high level of play.

First of all. I didn't say "it's just a fluke." Don't put words into my mouth.
AZEN posted that Lee is the only MK he's done better against using his own MK. Is it just a fluke that Azen happens to do better to just about every other MK in the top level of the competitive scene with Lucario over MK?

How can you compare 3 of the top players who have been around a "Fluke" when you obviously know they're not, that have already proven time and time again. Lee Martin was a first time thing that we saw where Azen was forced to switch it up. If there does happen to be a fluke in any of that, it WOULD be that.

 

[Overswarm]

No, I said there's people at high levels of play (not necessary elite) that take over Metaknights that play at a the same high level of play.

This is a rarity; the metaknight almost always wins. That's why people remember the instances offhand where the MK loses: it is incredibly rare.

First of all. I didn't say "it's just a fluke." Don't put words into my mouth.

You insinuated it was a one-time deal that doesn't really count; that's a fluke.

AZEN posted that Lee is the only MK he's done better against using his own MK. Is it just a fluke that Azen happens to do better to just about every other MK in the top level of the competitive scene with Lucario over MK?

Considering the most common character Lee plays against is Lucario, I think this matchup is more indicative of MK's ability to destroy Lucario if they have enough practice.

How can you compare 3 of the top players who have been around a "Fluke" when you obviously know they're not, that have already proven time and time again. Lee Martin was a first time thing that we saw where Azen was forced to switch it up. If there does happen to be a fluke in any of that, it WOULD be that.

I'm saying they aren't giving you points in the "don't ban MK" game.

M2k switched from D3, Azen's picked up MK and used him for the final rounds in tournaments on a consistent basis, and DSF has picked up MK as well. This is not coincidence.

To add to that, these people have decades of experience and are having trouble with people that are brand new in comparison. No one has any names that consistently beat the good metaknights EXCEPT these people that have years and years of playing competitively under their belts.

It's the players, not the characters they use, that are making the playing field appear more even. Regardless, Lee forced Azen to switch to MK. If you're going to say that everyone else can do what Azen/M2K/DSF can do (even though they have years more experience and play Metaknight), I'm going to say everyone can do what Lee can do (beat an amazing player by using MK).

 

[Dojo]

This is a rarity; the metaknight almost always wins. That's why people remember the instances offhand where the MK loses: it is incredibly rare.

Not as rare as you make it out to be. It's been done on plenty of occasions. And will continue to happen in the future.

You insinuated it was a one-time deal that doesn't really count; that's a fluke.

I never said it didn't count. Lee is an extraordinary player who's really managed to step it up to a higher level. Doesn't change the fact he's the only person who's done that to Azen.

Considering the most common character Lee plays against is Lucario, I think this matchup is more indicative of MK's ability to destroy Lucario if they have enough practice.

Is it not possible that MK's in the East Coast tourney's haven't played Azen's Lucario plenty and he still has an easier time against them with Lucario?

I'm saying they aren't giving you points in the "don't ban MK" game.

M2k switched from D3, Azen's picked up MK and used him for the final rounds in tournaments on a consistent basis, and DSF has picked up MK as well. This is not coincidence.

To add to that, these people have decades of experience and are having trouble with people that are brand new in comparison. No one has any names that consistently beat the good metaknights EXCEPT these people that have years and years of playing competitively under their belts.

It's the players, not the characters they use, that are making the playing field appear more even. Regardless, Lee forced Azen to switch to MK. If you're going to say that everyone else can do what Azen/M2K/DSF can do (even though they have years more experience and play Metaknight), I'm going to say everyone can do what Lee can do (beat an amazing player by using MK).

Perhaps they all have. So what? I'm not denying the fact that MK is an extremely good character. The way you make him out to be is to the point where he's completely unbeatable. These players pretty much are.

To add to that, good MK's have been beaten by people pretty much unheard of with a strong relative skill. I've been beaten by a couple of brawl newcomers that never played Melee.

It is the players skill that count. Not the characters. What you said about Lee beating an amazing player is obsolete. He didn't beat an amazing player at HOBO 11. He beat a bunch of strong players, but not an amazing one. It doesn't take away the fact that Lee himself isn't an amazing player in general.

 

[Plum]

I don't really like the idea... Or we ban MK, or we don't ban him. A handicap would be not satisfiying at all (After that, some people will say that Snake needs a 10% handicap, then G&W maybe...)

But going on and claiming a slippery slope will result if action against MK is taken really won't happen. Scrubs will complain saying that they are also too good but do we ever listen to scrubs? Any other top tier character has bad matchups and neutral matchups. MK only has neutral.

Does MK really make the game unplayable? Of course not. Go on Youtube and you can find tons of videos of Lucario mains, G&W mains, Snake mains, Ice Climber mains, or who ever have you beating MK players. To say he breaks the game would be to claim that he is leagues above every other character. The fact that he has even matchups already proves this wrong.

Taking MK away from the picture doesn't open up any gates to other characters either. Some other top tier or high tier character would own [new viable character] just as hard. One of the criteria for a ban is whether or not it would make the game better. With MK banned no new characters are going to be winning big tournaments, and the new winners are just going to be the other tournament characters we see now. Okay, some might see that as better, but those people are scrubs. Scrubs don't want to practice against MK to beat him. Don't be a scrub

And the idea that if the ban hammer doesn't come down that the Smash world will centralize around MK even more so is wrong IMO. In a small region than yes, it is more likely to have MK spread like a virus. But in a big city area, or even on the national scale, saying that everyone will have to switch to MK is silly. Me for example, MK doesn't fit my play style at all. I can play a better Jiggs then my MK. That Jiggs is going to get ***** by anyone knowing what they are doing, but my MK would get hit even harder. Given time will it grow? Well yes, saying it won't is saying that there are no players out there who care about winning over anything.

MK dominates the current metagame but that is because so many out there feel like taking the easy solution; ban the reason I can't win rather than develop their own characters meta and practice to beat him. Playing to learn is a majority of Smash. I feel as though those who say we need him banned want to ignore playing to learn. Why should they practice when an easier solution is to band together and force a MK ban?