Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
honestly, if MK were to use this as an approach, i'd just punish the ending lag =/ plain and simple it really isn't anything special as an approach, i've seen it used b4 when MK has just KO'd the other person and uses it to stay away from them during invinciblity which, imo is also cheap, but its only banned for stalling purposes, nobody said it couldn't be used otherwise.
MK is said to have no disadvanteageous match-ups. Snake has some bad match-ups.
So, in an MK ditto, what happens?
wtf is the edge-middle neutral thing?Have we not talked about the edge-middle neutral thing already?
Or that it can basically allow MK to control spacing whenever he wants, run away when ever he wants, and edge camp whenever he wants?
Or that he can get past projectiles so easily with this that it eliminates giant parts of a character's game play and allows him to completely dominate?
If he does it one time in the match...
Where is the proof that it can be used as anything besides a stall? We don't need to test it. His attack out of the cape is pretty pitiful, and all this would do is make his cape reach far. Nobody wants to test it because it would ruin a tournament. Nobody is going to pay money to lose to some **** smashing his cstick.
Well it can get MK out of a bad situation. That's one use.
One post a day before=lively discussion?
So basically, ban all new ATs and tricks discovered for MK? If he's REALLY at that point now where his metagame can't be allowed to advance without him becoming too powerful, he might as well be banned.
Stop whining, it's banned anyway
I don't think you understand, if CF or someone low tier had this technique I could see it being banned. Besides, MK has very few real AT's. Most characters don't (depending on what you call an AT). They're not banning this because it would make MK specifically too powerful, they banned it because it would be broken on any character. A technique that makes you completely invulnerable for as long as you like should be banned period, unless you can limit it reasonably, and at this point in time and in the near future it looks like there will not be a reasonable way to limit it other than outright banning it.
I think what they meant is that if you were to allow it, you would have to define stalling through this technique. Making very specific rules on a technique (Repetitions, Duration, etc) is not only usually hard to upkeep/enforce, but they also attract a lot of subjective views since it IS hard to define what stalling is. Some people say that running away period/at all slows the match down and delays play, while some people think that running away is fine but that Stalling would be something like edge camping or abusing something to stay invulnerable completely.
I really hate this assumption that because it renders MK invulnerable, its auto-broken. It also leaves MK with few options out of it while doing it (waiting to attack, fleeing, stalling,). And my proposal clearly nerfs those (and kills incentive to stall). Melee Fox could parry any move with shines, ICs could 0-death CG, D3 wrecks several character witn an infinite. Did we just look at those instances and say BAN NAO before it can actually do anything (assuming it would do anything substantial)?
It's not just an assumption, it's fact. This would make ANY CHARACTER BROKEN! ANY! U give this to Captain Falcon and it would STILL be banned.
I wanna hear your proposal (Not sure what page it is posted on). Because the way the current situation looks like, U either allow it with caps/definitions on stalling or outright ban it. I've yet to see a way for someone to universally define stalling with it that is also easy to enforce. Also, when people "stall" they usually do it to win, otherwise ur right why Stall when you increase your risk of losing when you are down? lol.
1. If both MKs use IDC, its treated the same as both MKs NOT using IDC.
I'll give up when a VIDEO showing IDC as a broken tool (besides stalling) EVER surfaces. Statements in the end aren't good enough unproven.
There doesn't need to be another reason for it to be banned. It is a good Stalling Tool that is HARD to put guidelines on other than just removing it completely. I think it is clear that this should not be allowed completely unrestricted. There is no good way to put guidelines over it or to reasonably reduce it's potentcy, hence it is banned.
That scenario, I'm assuming the opponent is on his last stock when KOed by IDC. In that case, the MK wins. He won via KOing all his opponent's stocks.
No, I meant what if he has two stocks, MK has two stocks, and he uses the IDC to Stall and then kills him before time runs out.
Ditto. I just returned from Orlando with no food. And I appreciate the lack of immature discussion. ^_^
The way SBR handled it is why I continue to yell for unbanning. The "inability to tell stalling" argument is pretty much defeated (my proposal), and the "its too broken as approach" argument is unproven (YOU don't even appear to believe it based on this quote).
