I guess the biggest problem here would just be that as a community we haven't really created a solid definition for scrub. There are certainly a lot of people that support the way Sirlin defined it, but the way you explain it doesn't seem wrong either.
Though I wouldn't agree with the idea it places every new person into that category. Casuals maybe, but the whole concept in Sirlin's definition is that they are not playing to win. New people can do that if they choose. It's more so the people who deny using the best tactics to win-- like chain grabbing and declare everyone who does use such methods cheap.
And as far as trying to advance the Capt's game and testing it in a tourney scene, that's definitely not scrubbish as far as I understand it. The best place to try out anything is always against other people trying to win so you can gouge how effective something is. If you're not playing to win, more than likely you won't be trying to advance any characters game anyway.
The last sentence doesn't match up with either of the current definitions either.Seeing as anyone from DSF to Sky could say that joking or serious and play well.
Debating like this is a start. Bringing up valid and observable points that can't be refuted furthers that idea. A lot of what people bring up about MK is usually player or match specific which is shown from the different results people get with various different characters. There is no near absolute outcome as there often is with ban worthy characters. I know many of us are impatient when it comes to things we enjoy and making it better from our perspective, but until we have definite results to act on, as a community all we can do is wait and act accordingly to what is now.
You may have to use specific examples for this point, because the way I read it, this seems more in favor to MK.
In the top metagame, MK has been stated to have several even match-ups and one or two slightly disadvantaged match-ups. Looking further at the attributes that give those characters even and advantaged match-ups also brings up the fact that other characters who are disadvantaged have similar options giving them them the chance at an uphill battle which banned characters do not. Even if it's only one or two times, if MK was banworthy he should have never lost to characters like Link at a high levels of play.
As for tactic vs tactic unless you are tying that into the 'same character vs same character example (say Torando vs Tornado) then that's an obviously flawed concept to add to the ban worthy check list, since we do that in every fighting game like it's rock, paper, scissors-- or in our case attack,shield, grab.
If you did mean the first however, then we haven't reached that point. As choosing that character against that character all comes down to preference at the moment. I often see top players with a Snake secondary switch instead of remaining MK, which if his chances of winning are miles higher than every other character doesn't make sense. The main factor as I see it in player mains switching to MK, is a mix of preference, diffidence, and misinformation.
If several people tell you, that no matter what you can never win against something if you are not using the the same thing and you don't have confidence in your ability you are obviously going to agree with them. It only helps if you like the way that character plays.
And Snake is almost more than half a ways above Wario, the third most dominant. Why?
Considering that MK is broken and needs to be banned, Snake would be the best right? Even so he shouldn't be so far ahead that the A rank seems to be doing poorly. Unless we figure in that Ankoku's chart also represents usage. If Snake suddenly became more popular than MK, he would rise above him as more people playing Snake would bring more results for him while the couple of people playing MK would still be getting similar results, the amount pouring in wouldn't be able to compare to Snake.
I'm not saying MK isn't placing well. I'm saying the reason his placing are so much higher than everyone elses is because there are far more MK players to place. Which relates back to my last point of preference.
So far I don't agree. However, I may have misunderstood you somewhere. If MK truly can not be overcome then we as a community need to come together and ban him as well, and if you can show me without a doubt that this is true, I'll gladly help in similar way as you are.
So, if you could quote the parts of Sirlin's article you feel support this idea and explain in more detail I would appreciate it.
Most Melee players say the entire roster is basically playable except for Pichu and Mewtwo. That doesn't mean they are right. Tournament results show they can't be.
And MK is the 4th lightest character in the game. Like Fox, if you make a mistake you are taking the damage. Unlike Melee of course, he won't be in and out with 70+ damage but he's not coming out unscathed, and considering his weakness it's not going to take that much for a ceiling K.O.
Defining effectively might be something else I have to ask you to do. Seeing as if that statement is true, why does he lose, ever?
Let alone at high levels of play.
You've never seen Peach picked in a response to Fox? You've never seen how Peach's dsmash wrecks space animals? Not even heard of a Peach chain grabbing Fox into oblivion? Fox is obviously better than Peach, I linked the guide so you could see what most melee Foxes were thinking. No everyone is not going to think the same as you, or I. Yes I have heard several people say Peach destroys Fox, yes I have seen it. If it happened more often you'd think the same, but yes some people do believe Peach wins over Fox.
Take note of who I'm referencing opinions too as well. I personally did not ever say I believe Peach has the advantage. There are still Smash 64 tournament that go on on Kaileria, and from what I see and read, there's not a lot of low tier-middle character love. I guess you could blame it on the community for not agreeing with you, but that and SmashWiki were the main things I was looking at and recalling while typing my original post.
Are we all ignorant to the smash scene for not sharing your opinion?
For who?
Are you saying Nannerz can't win against a MK with Diddy? Fly Amanita has no chance against one? No hope for Allucard? Aero should just switch to MK right now? Not even Chudat has any hope? MK denies Dark.Pch even an uphill?!Auto-loss for Danny? Mech should pack up his controller? Maxxxpower may as well quit?Reflex needs to stop lying to himself? Bwett should face reality?
Not unless they pick MK, Snake, Lucario, or Falco?!
I don't agree. Unless you meant 'except for 6 or 7 characters. Which is pretty generous for top tier/ best character. As I remember it, Fox was only really disadvantaged against Marth in high levels of play because of his range. Yes everyone else could exploit his weakness the same with MK's weight problem, but the best players won't often let opponents abuse those weaknesses.
Then what is a scrub?
I thought that was someone who didn't play to win but just to have fun, denying the best options to win.
By your opinion perhaps . He's currently the best. He can, has, and will continue to be beaten by good players. He can, has, and will continue to beat lesser players. This was the same with Fox as I saw it, and the same with many other fighting games in a scenario against the best character in game. Why should this change for Brawl?
Good players don't lose with broken characters. This is because broken characters have options that shut down every uncontrollable option in game. The closet thing MK had to that was his tornado, which now has a thread dedicated to it's destruction. As far as results show MK is fair against a reasonable amount of characters, uphill for a majority, and upmountain if not impossible for the rest--as expected of the best character in the game.
And you don't always have to be. Looking at Reflex's Wario and M2K's MK I personally believe M2K is a better player for the way he reacts immediately to situations where as I often to see Reflex probing before action.
But Reflex has won against M2K's MK. He played better that match, plain and simple. If you can't ask that of yourself every match then you had better hope MK trips into an Ike Fsmash.
salaboB
I didn't skip over your post purposely. I went in reverse to the responses to my post. I'll respond when I get home.
