Metaknight Officially Banned In Italy.

[Master Raven]

Wait so rather than trying to help prevent the game from turning into MK vs MK by learning the matchup with characters that do good vs MK (Ex: Snake and Diddy), you're actually attempting to help cause it in hopes of him getting banned?

LOL

 

[phosphorus]

Good for Italy. Meta Knight is beatable, but like XIF said, the tier list is basically a ranking of how well each character does against Meta Knight. I'll admit that some of the reasons presented in the OP seem kind of weak, but they might have been (unintentionally or not) taken out of context (there are also a wide selection of better reasons). You might as well not even list Meta Knight on the list. If this spreads, maybe it will serve as a "shot across the bow" for Sakurai?

 

[Sliq]

1 - Anther ($235.00) - Pikachu
2 - Needle of Juntah ($115.00) - G&W
3 - Joshu ($40.00) - DDD
4 - Tink - G&W and Wario
T5 - Overswarm - Metaknight
T5 - Sliq - Bowser and Ganondorf
T7 - Lain - G&W
T7 - Rofa - Metaknight
T9 - 1der - Mario
T9 - Kel - Metaknight
T9 - Blood Hawk - Lucario
T9 - Smash64 - Ness
T13 - Doctor X - Pit
T13 - Samurai(no space)Panda - Snake
T13 - Big C - Snake
T13 - Ryzen Xia
T17 - Legan
T17 - Nojoes
T17 - Omniswell - IC's
T17 - Rook - Snake
T17 - Asdioh - Kirby
T17 - OOK - DK
T17 - Thinkaman - Jiggs
T17 - Kyari - G&W
T25 - YBM
T25 - Slimpyman
T25 - EarthHero
T25 - Toga
T25 - Iggy
T25 - Scala - Yoshi
T25 - Jons
T25 - Epic - Zelda
---------- CUTOFF ----------
T33 - Princess Aura - G&W
T33 - MachinegunNorm
T33 - Pythag
T33 - DastrnMarco - G&W
T33 - Metal
T33 - Infern Angelis
T33 - Jekyll - Ganondorf
T33 - Mr. E
T41 - Dark Kakashi
T41 - Spoon
T41 - TheBlueBlade
T41 - Este - Metaknight

Look at those Metaknights dominated the top placements. It's sickening, is what it is.

 

[LinkSceptile333]

Haha, that's funny. I bet the Italians have Mario as Top-Tier.

 

[DanGR]

Wait so rather than trying to help prevent the game from turning into MK vs MK by learning the matchup with characters that do good vs MK (Ex: Snake and Diddy), you're actually attempting to help cause it in hopes of him getting banned?

LOL

Think of it this way, I'm using him to use against MK.

Look at those Metaknights dominated the top placements. It's sickening, is what it is.

Look at where the only MKs at the tourney actually placed.

 

[napZzz]

brawls gonna turn into mk dittos eventually. And Its kinda stupid that people get told to "pick up" a character JUST for meta knight...its gay.

 

[Sliq]

Think of it this way, I'm using him to use against MK.


Look at where the only MKs at the tourney actually placed.

Congratulations, you're a dumbass.

 

[DanGR]

Congratulations, you're a dumbass.

Thanks. I appreciate it. I really do.

Edit: From the info you gave me, only 4/44 (If I counted right) used MK. 3 went top 9. that's 3/12.

What's more disturbing is that Overswarm used MK, not Rob.

 

[Master Raven]

brawls gonna turn into mk dittos eventually. And Its kinda stupid that people get told to "pick up" a character JUST for meta knight...its gay.

What is wrong with that? I picked up DK primarily for MKs and Snakes, and I play a lot of other characters too for certain matchups.

 

[LuigiKing]

Sliq, isn't that just selective finding? Overswarm switched to MK after Vidjo beat him with MK, coming in first place at the tournament.

 

[Anther]

Bunch of people "Picked" up characters for melee too. A lot of has to do with people not being able to tolerate exploring a character past cool flashy stuff... but anyways. I think a lot of chars can compete with meta if you learn how to play against him and just get good with your char.
DanGR if you were being serious, the top placing metas are all good players, and there's a meta that lost out in pools >.>. Rofa placed 2nd behind DSF's meta in Cali but got 7th at this tourney, no johns.

OS is trying to show meta's brokeness, but I think he's doing just as good as he was with ROB, but he may vouch that a lot of his matchups are easier though, I'm sure he'll vocalize on it sooner or later.

 

[DanGR]

OS is trying to show meta's brokeness, but I think he's doing just as good as he was with ROB, but he may vouch that a lot of his matchups are easier though, I'm sure he'll vocalize on it sooner or later.

Meh...I say the same thing, but I get rude remarks...

 

[XIF]

Bunch of people "Picked" up characters for melee too. A lot of has to do with people not being able to tolerate exploring a character past cool flashy stuff... but anyways. I think a lot of chars can compete with meta if you learn how to play against him and just get good with your char.
DanGR if you were being serious, the top placing metas are all good players, and there's a meta that lost out in pools >.>. Rofa placed 2nd behind DSF's meta in Cali but got 7th at this tourney, no johns.

OS is trying to show meta's brokeness, but I think he's doing just as good as he was with ROB, but he may vouch that a lot of his matchups are easier though, I'm sure he'll vocalize on it sooner or later.

I 3 and 4 stocked 2 different Fox players in a melee tournament last weekend with my peach. That doesnt make the matchup any more or less abysmal for peach, it just means that those guys sucked <_<;

I like how people are selectively overlooking the fact of how alot of these people placing top with other characters are actually picking metaknight for certain matchups throughout the tournament.

 

[Crizthakidd]

i actually like using mk tho. i saw this one dude who was too good with mk and didint use a nado for like 3 mins straight . lol korn? anyway pple have to main a char like diddy or lucario just to beat mk or have a better chance. its gay how i can vs someones secondary and be able to 2 stock them then they bust out mk and i stand at a disadvantage. i mained mk in the japanese release since he was mad cool and reminds me of melee marth but now pple just like bish and complain and ban him lolol.

why u gosta hate mah mkz!?

 

[Yuna]

I'd just like to emphasize one thing.

Pure MK v MK has not happened yet, but will. When Yuna says, "Only UNTIL it happens will MK be banned" I want to just puke, because by the time that happens, brawl will have died. It's not like pure MK v MK dittos will last for years before MK gets banned. Brawl will never reach that point. As tourneys gradually become this, brawl's competitive scene will break down. I can guarantee I won't be playing this game for much longer if this continues. I guess I'm a scrub Yuna, eh? for not using MK?

I'm sorry, I said this in this thread when? In fact, I've said this when?

What I have said, Mr. Puky Mouth, is that Meta-Knight is not "too good". He's not in any way on such a level that tournaments will devolve into him being the only viable character or quite possibly just him and two or three other characters who can stand up to him.

No, it will not, especially considering how most of his matchups are 6:4s, anyway.

You're not a Scrub for not using MK, you're a Scrub for whining about it when chances are your main(s) only have a slight disadvantage against him and you whine as if it's an auto-loss.

Look at where the only MKs at the tourney actually placed.

He's so good and unbeatable. Then how come none of those placed Top 3? There were two G&Ws in that Top 7. Ban?

I like how people are selectively overlooking the fact of how alot of these people placing top with other characters are actually picking metaknight for certain matchups throughout the tournament.

So MK should be banned because people are selectively using him as a secondary to counterpick their weakest matchups? Whoopity doo, ban all characters that allow people to do this then. Which would amount to Top- + High Tier being banned.



In conclusion, I'd like to add that the Smash scene is still young. Every time something new pops up, people treat it like the 8th wonder of the world, deserving of either endless devotion or scorn. Ouh, a single character lacks any real bad matchups, having 6-4s with the most of the cast. ZOMG! Too good! Ban NAO!

Anyone with any insight it into other major Competitive fighting game scene would laugh (and I do) at this. Several other scenes have experienced the same. Guess what, they didn't ban characters for it. And the scene didn't devolve into X vs. X (literally for SCII). Because 6-4 is far from unbeatable and a guaranteed win!

If people just bothered to try to devise new ways to combat Meta-Knight, they wouldn't lose so much. Also, just because many people are flocking to Meta-Knight doesn't mean he's magically better than before. He's just more popular. So what if you have to fight 29 Metas each tournament?

Are they winning? Are they taking the majority of the Top 10 spots at almost any major tournament? So what if there are 900 of them if only 12 or so of them can even place decently at a major tournament?

 

[XIF]

I'm sorry, I said this in this thread when? In fact, I've said this when?

What I have said, Mr. Puky Mouth, is that Meta-Knight is not "too good". He's not in any way on such a level that tournaments will devolve into him being the only viable character or quite possibly just him and two or three other characters who can stand up to him.

No, it will not, especially considering how most of his matchups are 6:4s, anyway.

You're not a Scrub for not using MK, you're a Scrub for whining about it when chances are your main(s) only have a slight disadvantage against him and you whine as if it's an auto-loss.


He's so good and unbeatable. Then how come none of those placed Top 3? There were two G&Ws in that Top 7. Ban?


So MK should be banned because people are selectively using him as a secondary to counterpick their weakest matchups? Whoopity doo, ban all characters that allow people to do this then. Which would amount to Top- + High Tier being banned.

more like people are realizing how you can't go wrong with metaknight. Overswarm's first practice... let alone tournament use of and he gets fifth.

And I believe although chillindude mains falco he said at some recent tournament (CH4?) he used metaknight extensively and wants to use him more and more. I am illustrating how there is a gradual migration towards metaknight. Please quit being a **** and I'd love to hear your response to my earlier post.

 

[Yuna]

more like people are realizing how you can't go wrong with metaknight. Overswarm's first practice... let alone tournament use of and he gets fifth.

How early into the meta-game was this, how many good people were there and since when is Overswarm a bad player? Ken's first Brawl tournament (I think) and he got 2nd. Wow, ban Marth now.

You just described character popularity. So people feel like playing him more for various reasons, some of which are "having an easier time winning than others". This doesn't mean he's "too good". It just means he's good. Prove he's "too good", not just that he's "good" and popular.

I'll check out your previous post if you'll check out my previous post (the one you just quoted) and reply to the new stuff that I just edited into it.

 

[Morrigan]

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=182103

too late,the metagame is officially dead.

Ohh no, an online MK-only tourney!

 

[XIF]

In conclusion, I'd like to add that the Smash scene is still young. Every time something new pops up, people treat it like the 8th wonder of the world, deserving of either endless devotion or scorn. Ouh, a single character lacks any real bad matchups, having 6-4s with the most of the cast. ZOMG! Too good! Ban NAO!

Anyone with any insight it into other major Competitive fighting game scene would laugh (and I do) at this. Several other scenes have experienced the same. Guess what, they didn't ban characters for it. And the scene didn't devolve into X vs. X (literally for SCII). Because 6-4 is far from unbeatable and a guaranteed win!

If people just bothered to try to devise new ways to combat Meta-Knight, they wouldn't lose so much. Also, just because many people are flocking to Meta-Knight doesn't mean he's magically better than before. He's just more popular. So what if you have to fight 29 Metas each tournament?

Are they winning? Are they taking the majority of the Top 10 spots at almost any major tournament? So what if there are 900 of them if only 12 or so of them can even place decently at a major tournament?

I'm pretty sure if the Street Fighter community found out that metaknight was as good as he is and plus he can become literally invincible... they would laugh at us for considering allowing him.

Chun Li with a way to make her self unhittable in third strike? insta-ban.

Look, you shouldnt have to be far and away absolutely better than the metaknight in order to win. Metaknight is given all the rewards and it basically boils down to the guy struggling to just break even with metaknight. Why should it fall upon others who want to develop other characters to toil away and give up alot of potential money just because you can still technically win against metaknight?

its just not fair, and thats the point.

And your point about "just learning to deal with it" is completely absurd. The point is that now with the top players, metaknight is dominating, and simply guessing that there are ways around it is not enough of an argument to convince anyone. It isnt happening.

 

[XIF]

You just described character popularity.

HE'S POPULAR BECAUSE HE IS B-R-O-K-E-N!!!

there doesnt necessarily have to be a distinction.

 

[DanGR]

Edit: This is all my opinion. I'm not neccesarily saying it's fact.

I'm sorry, I said this in this thread when? In fact, I've said this when?

What I have said, Mr. Puky Mouth, is that Meta-Knight is not "too good". He's not in any way on such a level that tournaments will devolve into him being the only viable character or quite possibly just him and two or three other characters who can stand up to him.

I'm not going to look through all your posts. What I know is that you have either directly or indirectly said that MK won't get banned unless major tournaments devolve into MK dittos because all other characters become unviable. I'm sure others could back me up here. It doesn't matter though.

My point is still valid. MK is increasing in popularity, and MK dittos will inevitably ruin this game. It's not ONLY a matter of how good he is. No-one is dumb enough to say that MK is the only viable tourney character.

The people that tend to be attracted to this game don't want to play brawl if it means there's only MK dittos or they have to play MKs every other match. MORE people will quit brawl if this happens. (whether that means they're scrubs or not doesn't matter. To have pros, you need scrubs. That's how the world works believe it or not) If MK's numbers in-tourney continues to increase, this game will cease to be competitive. That's the bottom line. What MK's popularity in tourneys is fueled by DOESN'T MATTER. If you disagree here, I can't argue with you anymore, because I'm a muslim and you're hindu.

No, it will not, especially considering how most of his matchups are 6:4s, anyway.

You're not a Scrub for not using MK, you're a Scrub for whining about it when chances are your main(s) only have a slight disadvantage against him and you whine as if it's an auto-loss.

I use Olimar. Currently I second Snake, and I'm beginning to pick up MK. I don't have big problems with MK. What I have problems with are your rude comments. It's very unprofessional and makes you look like a jerk. It makes it very hard to respect you. If you weren't so knowledgable, I would completely disregard your posts. But as it is, you're probably smarter than me, and I could learn a thing or two from you, so here we are.

If people just bothered to try to devise new ways to combat Meta-Knight, they wouldn't lose so much. Also, just because many people are flocking to Meta-Knight doesn't mean he's magically better than before. He's just more popular. So what if you have to fight 29 Metas each tournament?

Before this happens, tourneys won't exist. Personally, would you play this game if everyone around you used MK? (assuming you play this game) I know I wouldn't.

 

[Yuna]

I 3 and 4 stocked 2 different Fox players in a melee tournament last weekend with my peach. That doesnt make the matchup any more or less abysmal for peach, it just means that those guys sucked <_<;

Peach vs. Fox in Melee is not an abysmal matchup. Yes, in NTSC, it's most probably her worst matchup, but just because it's her worst doesn't mean it's abysmal. It's not a 10-0, 8-2 or even a 7-3. It's, at most a 6-3, still winnable.

first: Yuna is not someone I would take seriously. anyone who thinks that banning metaknight is not a consideration cannot be taken too seriously...

Funny, you just disqualified yourself from serious debate my making random guesses of what I've said in the past and am saying now. When have I ever stated that it "is not a consideration" to ban Meta-Knight? When? When did I say anything that could even be misconstrued as such?

What I am saying is that at this writing moment, Meta-Knight is not yet "too good" enough to ban. He's just plain good at the moment. Now if the meta-game evolves in such a direction that he actually becomes "too good", then by all means, let's ban him universally. But at this writing moment, no, just no.

but each to their own opinion I suppose, but I definitely disagree with the notion that banning characters is automatically scrub mentality.

And I've never said this either. Please stop making random accusations without having ever heard someone actually state the things you claim I've stated. I mocked them for thinking that at this writing moment, Meta-Knight should be banned.

He shouldn't. That's my educated opinion and you can disagree with it, as long as you do it intelligently or I will mock you as well.

In some cases yes, but metaknight warrants a serious discussion, not a volley of vague insults.

Serious discussion is warranted. Serious discussion will be held. But people who post BS deserve BS in return. Did you notice how the people I quoted wrote only BS? Their arguments were loose, held no merit and were at times just plain wrong, which was why I mocked them.

I bet you didn't even read the posts I mocked and immediately assumed I just hate everyone who want to ban Meta-Knight for some reason. I skipped all the posts that didn't warrant mocking or rewriting for humorous purposes (I quoted several posts I agreed with and exaggerated them).

If some idiot uses (hypothetically) "Meta-Knight should be banned! He is my main's worst matchup!", of course I'll mock their idiotic excuse for an argument. None of the people I mocked actually used intelligent arguments to prove he's too good, only saying "Yes, he should be banned!" or "Yes, he should be banned because <untrue things>."

I want to say this off the bat:

Brawl will not grow as a fighting game at all until metaknight is banned.

Untrue.

This is why:

Metaknight is certainly beatable. I will not argue this. Metaknight is also far and away better than every other character.

No, he is not. He's the best character. But he's not by far better than everyone else. Yes, he holds no horrendously bad matchup, but neither do Marth, Snake, D3 and G&W. They just have a few bad ones (Marth and G&W not so much).

And his matchups are mostly 6-4, which is a very winnable matchup. Barr pretty much only already unviable characters, every single character he beats stands a fair chance of beating him. He's got the advantage, but he's not so far ahead of everyone else the meta-game will not grow with him around.

I think we can all agree on this, with some leeway on the "far and away." But the idea is that its never a bad idea to use metaknight in every match up, where as every other character can not say that.

This is what secondaries are for. If your character has good matchups against pretty much everyone, then you don't have to do that. Congratulations, you just won the matchup lottery. There are four other characters with virtually none or at least very few bad matchups.

So what if Meta-Knight has none? He still has matchups where it's pretty much 5-5 or 5-4 while the others have, what, 5-4 and 6-4s? Horrible, I know.

Meta-Knight is not leagues better than everyone else. He's still just better.

What has happened now is that the entirety of the metagame has revolved around not necessarily "my chances of winning are so much higher with metaknight than anyone else" and more so of "my character selection is based solely upon how well I can do against metaknight". This issue is only compounded by the fact is that indeed the answer to the second statement is the first.

With Meta-Knight gone, it will be "My character selection is based solely upon how well I can do against Snake, D3, Marth and R.O.B.". People will still have to counterpick if they want to be able to handle all matchups.

That will not change just with Meta-Knight gone.

A lot of proof and what not has been put forth by others using tournament placings showing this and this character beating out metaknight. Rather than supporting the notion that metaknight is not that broken, I think it does quite the opposite. Look at how you divide it. It's Metaknight versus the entirety of the 35 character roster. You have the combined forces of D3, snake, falco, ROB, and reflex's wario to even equate to the dominance of metaknight. At least in melee, when you think about the dominant characters, you have about a third or so of the tournaments dominated by fox and marth, with the other 2 thirds or so with the other 6 or so characters below them. As it is now its just basically half metaknight alone and then half another 5 or so characters.

Because he's popular. He's slightly better than everyone else, but the more tournaments you host, the more he's gonna win, increasing his lead.

Many of the U.S. best players also play Meta-Knight, which explains why he's so dominant. Also, the Melee metagame you're speaking of only came about after years of development.

There were Years of Sheik, Years of Marth, Year of Fox and Year of Space Animals. At any point in time, there was one or two characters totally dominating the tournament scene earlier on during its lifespan.

How can you say that we know enough about the game after less than a year to state with absolute certainty "This is how it's gonna be"? Have we discovered all there is to discover? Have we tried every single venue with the game? Have you tried to develop every single characters' metagame against Meta-Knight to its fullest?

But even that in and of itself is not needed to warrant a ban. Simply put, the community has already decided the ban long ago. it seems that everyone's answer to their metaknight woes is metaknight. The scene is slowly devolving into MK vs MK tournaments. Anyone remember kish cubed joking about how melee will slowly turn into nothing more than sheik vs sheik final D only? Its like thats really happening in Brawl. Its scary hearing all of your anecdotes on how this and this talented player dropped their main because of metaknight, and thus started to main metaknight!

When and if Meta-Knight becomes "too good" on paper and/or in practice, then ban him. Not just because "there's a trend" or "it's begun".

Yeah, and what if that changes? What if tomorrow, someone discovers a way to beat him as, say, Peach (yeah, I know)? It's too early both at this point in time and at the level he's reigning supreme at the moment. It's not "too bad" yet.

---Metaknight is the best character
---There is no situation where picking metaknight is a bad choice
---On top of that there are plenty of situations where you cannot safely resort to a character because of the possibility of metaknight
---This leads to everyone simply not even bothering with that uncertainty
---This leads to everyone picking metaknight

1) Not good enough. But it's a part of a whole, yes.
2) He has a few characters who go toe-to-toe with him. So counterpicking for a toe-to-toe matchup, not so good if there are better choices.
3) What, the 6-4s? Oh yes, how horrible, I might have to face a 6-4. I cannot possibly continue maining my character anymore!
4) So he's bannable because of people being lazy and wanting to win so much they'll instantly go for the best? It's not that he's "too good", it's that he's "too popular"?
5) Everyone picking Meta-Knight is not good enough. He has to be "too good"! Otherwise, we're punishing him for being popular. If everyone good started playing Peach tomorrow, would she be eligible for a ban? Prove he's too good, not that he's too popular.

Conclusion: The metagame has successfully devolved into a one character dominated scene, with very little room for other characters to develop simply because metaknight beats them outright.

It's not just important if he's dominating, it's important why he's dominating.

The consequence of banning metaknight is that zero incentive is given into developing his metagame, and thus he will not be explored anymore. But this also gives a very large incentive for 10 to 15 other characters to be explored in much further detail than previously would have been desirable for any one player simply because they have become a viable option.

So we're banning him because people are too lazy to bother with less viable characters. Logic.

And with Meta-Knight gone, it will still be a limited meta-game. Yes, the rest of the Tops and Highs have a few bad matchups, but those are still few and not even that bad for the most part. It will still be about either maining a Top or a High and then having a secondary to deal with your worst matchups.

It will still be so that the lesser viable will still fear facing the Tops and Highs and people having to get secondaries to deal with it!

The difference between this and melee is that in melee, if you remove fox and marth, then the best characters are Sheik and Falco, and not much has changed except for removing 2 characters and allowing maybe another one or 2 viable characters (mario and doc come to mind). If you continue to remove Sheik and Falco... Peach, CF, and IC's become the best and you allow maybe another couple of viable tournament characters (Link and ganondorf are 2 prominent ones that come to mind with the removal of the top 4 characters). Removal of characters in melee would only shift the metagame down a couple characters on the tier list. Essentially, low tier tournaments.

BS logic. Meta-Knight does not in any way render a character unviable that isn't otherwise already unviable. Name these supposed many (more than 2) characters which are rendered unviable solely because of Meta-Knight's presence. No, having a 6-4 against him does not render them unviable.

In brawl, removing metaknight certainly makes Snake, Falco, and Dedede the best three, but there are so many characters that are now viable options that it more than outweighs the cost of removing metaknight. Granted Ike still basically has about all the chance of beating Falco as Lyman has of trading at 60 dollars again (lawl stock market) but there are certainly many more characters than stand a chance (read: choosing to play as them is not a complete waste).

Name them. Don't throw arguments out there without supporting them. Name these supposed characters. Also, name your opinion of their matchups against Meta-Knight, these matchups that render them soooooo unviable.

Overswarm mentioned something about the distinction between removing metaknight making the community healthier, and have it follow that we should ban metaknight simply because of that.

Banning a lot of things would make the community healthier. That's not reason enough to do it. One must consider if it's called for and the cost vs. the gains.

Allowing everyone to slowly spiral down the slippery slope of a one character metagame is not going to strengthen us in the end. Eventually when people realize the large migration over to metaknight, many will be disinterested.

Super Street Fighter II: Turbo suffered months if not close to a year of Akuma beating the snot out of everyone else. Guess what, it's still going strong today. Meta-Knight has been dominating like this for, what, 2-3 months now? Yes, by all means, ban him now before it gets out of hand. Let's just assume it will get out of hand instead of wait to see it at least touch the surface of getting out of hand.

Who wants to play in a tournament where its just metaknight after metaknight? Assuming that I am completely wrong and that metaknight is beatable, that isn't the trend that we are seeing with the community. Ultimately, it is the players and the metagame which decide whats good, bad, outdated, the best, the worst, and so forth. To ignore that in this instance will only hurt all of us and possibly lead to the death of the scene.

If and when Meta-Knight is not only just popular but also proves unbeatable or at least so very hard to beat it's not worth not playing Meta-Knight, then it's time to ban him. As it stand at this writing moment, that's not how it is. You have not successfully proved this.

You have simply proved that he's "good" and "the best".

I am still probably never going to take brawl seriously, since I think there are many more problems with it aside from metaknight. The game to me is just fundamentally broken and has lost my interest as a serious fighter entirely. But I'd hate to see the community that still supports it screw themselves by not removing what is probably the only chance Brawl has at becoming a serious game.

Nor will I. And I'd hate for the community to take a hasty, Scrubby and stupid decision.

BTW, the reason why I didn't reply to this before was because I simply didn't see it. I often skim and when I do, I tend to disregard most posts that do not immediately catch my eye, like having so much BS they literally leap out at me or if there's a quote in there with my name in it. Or quite possibly if I see my name, but you didn't capitalize it so it blended in with the text while I was skimming. I wasn't being a ****, I just didn't see it.

 

[Sosuke]

Yunas posts are so long.
And have so much logic.
They remind me of books.
=o

Except they're actually interesting to read.

 

[Falconv1.0]

I dont understand why we never banned Melee Sheik since she completely destroyed characters in every way possible, and had no bad match-ups. Most character's MK destroys already suck balls.

I've shot this argument to pieces a thousand times already, the fact even the MK boards cant see the truth themselves is ****ing ridiculous. He's the best, not broken.


BTW, LOL at all the bull**** around Snake. He's good, he's not the best. Campers **** his ****. :/

 

[Yuna]

HE'S POPULAR BECAUSE HE IS B-R-O-K-E-N!!!

there doesnt necessarily have to be a distinction.

Prove that he's broken. You repeatedly just prove that he's popular. You never prove that he's broken using facts or simple rhetoric.

I'm not going to look through all your posts. What I know is that you have either directly or indirectly said that MK won't get banned unless major tournaments devolve into MK dittos because all other characters become unviable. I'm sure others could back me up here. It doesn't matter though.

Funny, I thought I just told you that if Meta-Knight becomes the only viable character or it's just about him and a select few others who can stand up against him, then it's time to ban him. This is what I've always said, not that we have to wait 'til he's literally the only viable character racking up wins for 5 months straight (although other communities have done that).

My point is still valid. MK is increasing in popularity, and MK dittos will inevitably ruin this game. It's not ONLY a matter of how good he is. No-one is dumb enough to say that MK is the only viable tourney character.

Wait... did you just say that character popularity is important enough to warrant a ban? So it doesn't matter that he's not "too good" yet, but he's just too popular!

The people that tend to be attracted to this game don't want to play brawl if it means there's only MK dittos or they have to play MKs every other match. MORE people will quit brawl if this happens. (whether that means they're scrubs or not doesn't matter. To have pros, you need scrubs.

No, you don't. You obviously don't know what a Scrub is. Scrubbinness is a mentality, not a skill level.

That's how the world works believe it or not) If MK's numbers in-tourney continues to increase, this game will cease to be competitive.

My opinion is that we're far from that stage of the game.

That's the bottom line. What MK's popularity in tourneys is fueled by DOESN'T MATTER. If you disagree here, I can't argue with you anymore, because I'm a muslim and you're hindu.

Yes, character popularity is obviously enough to ban him. Excuse me while I convince everyone and their mother to start maining Kirby and tomorrow we can discuss banning him using this BS logic. The only thing that matters is whether or not he's too good.

I use Olimar. Currently I second Snake, and I'm beginning to pick up MK. I don't have big problems with MK. What I have problems with are your rude comments. It's very unprofessional and makes you look like a jerk.

Name these rude comments I've directed directly at you or specific other people in this thread other than in my big satirical "Quotation Post". And I'm sorry, it's a requirement to "be professional" on Smashboards now? And so what if I might or might not be a jerk to specific people? I'm not here to make friends with everyone and their puppy.

It makes it very hard to respect you.

If you can't respect me because of the way I treat people who are obvious idiots even if you agree with what I say or at least that I have very good points (if you do), then I could care less about garnering your respect. In fact, I don't crave your respect at all. Respect me or don't respect me, it's not my mission in life to win the respect of you and everyone else on Smashboards.

Now if you don't respect me because I'm just plain wrong (and you can prove it) or am stupid, then that's another matter altogether.

If you weren't so knowledgable, I would completely disregard your posts. But as it is, you're probably smarter than me, and I could learn a thing or two from you, so here we are.

Ah, there's the rub isn't it? I'm more knowledgable and intelligent than you. Thus, you cannot disregard what I say. Because no matter how "rude" I might be to others (and while I have a special air of snark, sarcasm, irony and derisiveness around me at all times, I'm very infrequently blatantly rude. No, saying that someone is wrong or calling them a Scrub is not rude if it's called for. I'm not here to be friends with everyone, I speak the truth and I do so bluntly).

Before this happens, tourneys won't exist. Personally, would you play this game if everyone around you used MK? (assuming you play this game) I know I wouldn't.

Yes, if he was still beatable. Because then I'd just friggin' beat him and so would anyone else who was good. Only good Metas would make it high, the rest would sink and lose and eventually quit or maybe rethink their choice of flocking to a character they might not be very good at (not every character is suitable for every player).

If he's still beatable, then I will have no need to quit playing Brawl (not that I'm playing it Competitively like I do Melee, anyway). So what if I have to play 29 of them each tournament if I'm still beating them? If and when I can no longer beat Meta-Knight unless I pick Meta-Knight himself or maybe one of his neutral matchups not because I'm just bad at the game but because the matchups are just so horrendously bad with everyone except the aforementioned characters, then I will fervently advocate a ban and/or quit the game.

It's called logical thinking.

 

[Yuna]

I dont understand why we never banned Melee Sheik since she completely destroyed characters in every way possible, and had no bad match-ups. Most character's MK destroys already suck balls.

Fox says "Hi". And Sheik wasn't even the worst matchup for certain characters.

Yunas posts are so long.
And have so much logic.
They remind me of books.
=o

Except they're actually interesting to read.

It's been suggested that I collect my posts into books for at least an interesting read. Maybe I will start doing that someday when I care enough to.

 

[Dojo]

Yunas posts are so long.
And have so much logic.
They remind me of books.
=o

Except they're actually interesting to read.

Indeed....

 

[brinboy789]

agreed with yuna. MK WILL NOT BE BANNED

*ends thread*

oo and i wonder how long it took yuna to write those long explanations xD

 

[Yuna]

agreed with yuna. MK WILL NOT BE BANNED

I never said that. I said that at this writing moment Meta-Knight is not yet good enough to ban. If and when this changes, then I shall start advocate banning him. But "seeing trends" and seeing "the start of something" is not good enough for such a drastic move as a character ban.

 

[DanGR]

If you can't respect me because of the way I treat people who are obvious idiots even if you agree with what I say or at least that I have very good points (if you do), then I could care less about garnering your respect.In fact, I don't crave your respect at all. Respect me or don't respect me, it's not my mission in life to win the respect of you and everyone else on Smashboards.

I feel sorry for you. I really do.

 

[Kitamerby]

Europe's best Marths don't count? Wow that's so ... well not racist but >_> They aren't bad.
I'd love to play them o.O Wanna have them come over? And people at high level do NOT spam fairs, it just doesn't work. At least in Melee it doesn't. If it does in Brawl, wait a few years for the metagame to improve.

BTW, spamming fair doesn't work at high level play, I'm saying it one more time. -_____-

Spamming Fair doesn't work.


Spamming Fsmash does! :D

 

[Yuna]

I'm pretty sure if the Street Fighter community found out that metaknight was as good as he is and plus he can become literally invincible... they would laugh at us for considering allowing him.

"He can become...". I hear that a lot. "I might happen" and "It will happen". Well, it's far from having happened or even coming close to have it happen at this moment. Thus, it's premature.

The Street Fighter community also waited for months if not a year before banning Akuma, who is ten times more blatantly better than everyone else than Meta-Knight will ever be.

Chun Li with a way to make her self unhittable in third strike? insta-ban.

Wait, you mean the Infinite Dimensional Cape? The one we banned?!

Look, you shouldnt have to be far and away absolutely better than the metaknight in order to win. Metaknight is given all the rewards and it basically boils down to the guy struggling to just break even with metaknight. Why should it fall upon others who want to develop other characters to toil away and give up alot of potential money just because you can still technically win against metaknight?

Because being the best character and having no blatantly bad matchups is not reason enough to ban a character. That just means they're good. Just because the Smash community seems to have a much greater affinity for tier whoring doesn't mean the rules suddenly change.

Meta-Knight isn't winning by a wide margin, he's winning by a pretty small one. Thus, not "too good".

its just not fair, and thats the point.

Life isn't fair. The question is if it's unfair enough.

And your point about "just learning to deal with it" is completely absurd. The point is that now with the top players, metaknight is dominating, and simply guessing that there are ways around it is not enough of an argument to convince anyone. It isnt happening.

But we have only been playing Brawl for a few months. I'm not guessing, I'm saying it's too premature to guess that there won't be ways to combat him.

And my most important point: He has not come to such a point where we must ban him yet. If and when that happens, I will gladly switch over to wanting Meta-Knight banned.

 

[XIF]

Peach vs. Fox in Melee is not an abysmal matchup. Yes, in NTSC, it's most probably her worst matchup, but just because it's her worst doesn't mean it's abysmal. It's not a 10-0, 8-2 or even a 7-3. It's, at most a 6-3, still winnable.


Funny, you just disqualified yourself from serious debate my making random guesses of what I've said in the past and am saying now. When have I ever stated that it "is not a consideration" to ban Meta-Knight? When? When did I say anything that could even be misconstrued as such?

Only idiots and Scrubs want to ban Meta-Knight. He's good, but he's not "too good".

Here.

What I am saying is that at this writing moment, Meta-Knight is not yet "too good" enough to ban. He's just plain good at the moment. Now if the meta-game evolves in such a direction that he actually becomes "too good", then by all means, let's ban him universally. But at this writing moment, no, just no.


And I've never said this either. Please stop making random accusations without having ever heard someone actually state the things you claim I've stated. I mocked them for thinking that at this writing moment, Meta-Knight should be banned.

Only idiots and Scrubs want to ban Meta-Knight. He's good, but he's not "too good".

and here.

He shouldn't. That's my educated opinion and you can disagree with it, as long as you do it intelligently or I will mock you as well.


Serious discussion is warranted. Serious discussion will be held. But people who post BS deserve BS in return. Did you notice how the people I quoted wrote only BS? Their arguments were loose, held no merit and were at times just plain wrong, which was why I mocked them.

I invite any Italian supporting the ban to contact me either through PM:s here on SWF or through MSN. He shall then have to present his case for why Meta-Knight should be banned and I shall then proceed to give him a well-deserved verbal thrashing (full of facts to support why he's an idiot and a Scrub).

This was before you even really heard any arguments from italy.


I bet you didn't even read the posts I mocked and immediately assumed I just hate everyone who want to ban Meta-Knight for some reason. I skipped all the posts that didn't warrant mocking or rewriting for humorous purposes (I quoted several posts I agreed with and exaggerated them).

If some idiot uses (hypothetically) "Meta-Knight should be banned! He is my main's worst matchup!", of course I'll mock their idiotic excuse for an argument. None of the people I mocked actually used intelligent arguments to prove he's too good, only saying "Yes, he should be banned!" or "Yes, he should be banned because <untrue things>."


Untrue.


No, he is not. He's the best character. But he's not by far better than everyone else. Yes, he holds no horrendously bad matchup, but neither do Marth, Snake, D3 and G&W. They just have a few bad ones (Marth and G&W not so much).

And his matchups are mostly 6-4, which is a very winnable matchup. Barr pretty much only already unviable characters, every single character he beats stands a fair chance of beating him. He's got the advantage, but he's not so far ahead of everyone else the meta-game will not grow with him around.


This is what secondaries are for. If your character has good matchups against pretty much everyone, then you don't have to do that. Congratulations, you just won the matchup lottery. There are four other characters with virtually none or at least very few bad matchups.

So what if Meta-Knight has none? He still has matchups where it's pretty much 5-5 or 5-4 while the others have, what, 5-4 and 6-4s? Horrible, I know.

Meta-Knight is not leagues better than everyone else. He's still just better.


With Meta-Knight gone, it will be "My character selection is based solely upon how well I can do against Snake, D3, Marth and R.O.B.". People will still have to counterpick if they want to be able to handle all matchups.


That will not change just with Meta-Knight gone.

The point is that you can pick metaknight and cover all of your options. It's not so much about counterpicking as it is only metaknight can handle every matchup with an advantage (I still say there is not a single character that is 5-5 with MK. Every other character has at least one bad matchup. In melee, the top 4 could all at least beat each other viably. Not the case here.


Because he's popular. He's slightly better than everyone else, but the more tournaments you host, the more he's gonna win, increasing his lead.

Many of the U.S. best players also play Meta-Knight, which explains why he's so dominant. Also, the Melee metagame you're speaking of only came about after years of development.

There were Years of Sheik, Years of Marth, Year of Fox and Year of Space Animals. At any point in time, there was one or two characters totally dominating the tournament scene earlier on during its lifespan.

Never during those years was the large majority of tournaments won by solely one character. Characters went in and out of vogue, but there was a pretty vast distribution intially between fox, marth, sheik, and CF (Isai <_<) and then Peach a tiny tiny bit, and then you saw some Falco's, but never was it just "oh great another win by *character* People generally saw players. See, in melee, I remember Recipherus, Ken, Isai, Eddie, etc winning. In brawl its "wow some other metaknight player."

How can you say that we know enough about the game after less than a year to state with absolute certainty "This is how it's gonna be"? Have we discovered all there is to discover? Have we tried every single venue with the game? Have you tried to develop every single characters' metagame against Meta-Knight to its fullest?

Metaknight doesnt need to give us the "Ban Me" Blow Job in order to warrant a ban. we should not have to wait until it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Gouki had certain qualities that made it a pretty obvious ban. Super Turbo may have gone through excruciating months of gouki dominance before a ban, but why should we have to wait for that? Its been out for about 9 months, sometimes you dont need a whole lot of time to determine whether a character is broken or now. Day 1 of Soul Calibur IV, they find out Ivy has an infinite. What happened? Insta-ban. They didnt wait for tournaments to see if it really dominated, it was just obviously too good. Metaknight is obviously too good. Explanation below.


When and if Meta-Knight becomes "too good" on paper and/or in practice, then ban him. Not just because "there's a trend" or "it's begun".

He has one move that does 15% and has high mobility plus priority to beat about 3/4ths of the games entire moveset. His up B can be done on reaction basically to cut through any approach. Glide attack is not beaten by any other movie, he has the best edge guard game, HE CAN FLY (twice), He has no bad matchups, no even matchups, everybody is starting to switch to metaknight because their character simply isnt worth playing because they lose badly to metaknight. He has no disadvantages in general. His only disadvantage is that he still has a hitbox, he can still be hit.

Oh wait, you can take that away too.

Yeah, and what if that changes? What if tomorrow, someone discovers a way to beat him as, say, Peach (yeah, I know)? It's too early both at this point in time and at the level he's reigning supreme at the moment. It's not "too bad" yet.

You can talk hypotheticals all you want, but you simply dont have the empirical evidence to support it. The metagame has evidence to support metaknight is too good because he is the most dominant force.


1) Not good enough. But it's a part of a whole, yes.
2) He has a few characters who go toe-to-toe with him. So counterpicking for a toe-to-toe matchup, not so good if there are better choices.
3) What, the 6-4s? Oh yes, how horrible, I might have to face a 6-4. I cannot possibly continue maining my character anymore!
4) So he's bannable because of people being lazy and wanting to win so much they'll instantly go for the best? It's not that he's "too good", it's that he's "too popular"?
5) Everyone picking Meta-Knight is not good enough. He has to be "too good"! Otherwise, we're punishing him for being popular. If everyone good started playing Peach tomorrow, would she be eligible for a ban? Prove he's too good, not that he's too popular.


It's not just important if he's dominating, it's important why he's dominating.

Well in a community that spawned directly out of the melee scene practically, we have to assume alot of these people dominating with him are good. He is dominating because he is good. Characters become popular because he is good.


So we're banning him because people are too lazy to bother with less viable characters. Logic.

And with Meta-Knight gone, it will still be a limited meta-game. Yes, the rest of the Tops and Highs have a few bad matchups, but those are still few and not even that bad for the most part. It will still be about either maining a Top or a High and then having a secondary to deal with your worst matchups.

Its still there. Snake, Falco, and D3 can all be beaten by ROB, Wario, Pit, Marth, game and watch, probably Luigi... and then you'd have other character that can still do somewhat well. Mario gets raaaaaped by metaknight, but can at least stand a chance of winning versus the rest. With Metaknight, game and watch, snake a little. and Reflex's wario, and thats about it for characters even worth spending time with.

It will still be so that the lesser viable will still fear facing the Tops and Highs and people having to get secondaries to deal with it!


BS logic. Meta-Knight does not in any way render a character unviable that isn't otherwise already unviable. Name these supposed many (more than 2) characters which are rendered unviable solely because of Meta-Knight's presence. No, having a 6-4 against him does not render them unviable.

My argument isnt that its because they are unwinnable, its that it becomes so much more fair. Get snake off the stage with metaknight and its over. Mario is actually completely unplayable really vs Metaknight. Bet Lucario would be doing alot better (Azen had to switch from Lucario against M2K's MK at a recent tournament... he went to metaknight)


Name them. Don't throw arguments out there without supporting them. Name these supposed characters. Also, name your opinion of their matchups against Meta-Knight, these matchups that render them soooooo unviable.


Banning a lot of things would make the community healthier. That's not reason enough to do it. One must consider if it's called for and the cost vs. the gains.

I already stated what I think the cost to gain ration is.


Super Street Fighter II: Turbo suffered months if not close to a year of Akuma beating the snot out of everyone else. Guess what, it's still going strong today. Meta-Knight has been dominating like this for, what, 2-3 months now? Yes, by all means, ban him now before it gets out of hand. Let's just assume it will get out of hand instead of wait to see it at least touch the surface of getting out of hand.


If and when Meta-Knight is not only just popular but also proves unbeatable or at least so very hard to beat it's not worth not playing Meta-Knight, then it's time to ban him. As it stand at this writing moment, that's not how it is. You have not successfully proved this.

You have simply proved that he's "good" and "the best".


Nor will I. And I'd hate for the community to take a hasty, Scrubby and stupid decision.

I will also say one general comment about popularity.

The reason why he is so popular is because he is the best. He has very little risk and absurdly high reward with little effort. His entire playstyle is bereft of mindgames. simply observation will give you the best strategy. This is a competitive fighter as it stands now, characters just dont miraculously become popular. In every fighting game, people gravitate towards certain characters because they are good. Brawl is no exception.

 

[J4pu]

Funny, they already are. Meta-Knight is just dominating more. With Meta-Knight gone, what's going to stop Snake and D3? And Meta is not far beyond the others.

Let me go through this logical exercise (yet again):
Let's rate our skills in, oh, cooking on a scale of 1-10. I'm a 10, you're a 9, Aldwyn is a 7 and 5 other people are 1s.

If we have 6 cooking contests, the odds state that I should win 2 or 3 of them with you winning 2 and Aldwyn 1. But we're fighting each other all the way there, with the final battle often consisting of me beating you or Aldwyn by a small margin.

100 tournaments later, I'll have won 50 cooking contests, you will have won 30, Aldwyn 15 and the others the other 5. Does this mean I'm leagues ahead of you and Aldwyn? No. It just means that I've won more tournaments than you because I'm statistically probable to... due to a small margin of superiority.


Because the Italian Smash community consists of idiots, Scrubs and n00bs most of whom aren't even good at Smash!

I like your logical probability exercise, congrats, you just converted me completely to your side. Well I was until i finished writing this post then I realized there are too many variables, make a better/more accurate one and then perhaps you can have me 100% back.

I'm a sucker for good logic with number stats thrown in for credibility.

All you have to do to full-proof this is get a good distribution of tournament results (I recommend Ankoku's Character Rankings List) and calculate by your method what score each character gets (I'd say go out of 100 if you want to get all the characters in it)
yes, yes, the rankings list isn't a tier list, but it is something that over a long period of time should become a close resemblance to the EXACT probability of character "abilities" you were comparing to earlier against your comparable cooking example.
Of course if MK comes out a 100 and Snake/2nd place a 75, then I say gg MK, goodbye. I might feel differently if he had a counter, but he doesn't. And I'm not sure your mathematical calculation takes the possibilities for comebody countering you into it, if the 7 became a 9 against your cooking style then things change, but I guess I can't expect you to make sure everything is accounted for.

And if you didn't do the math to your first example and just threw in numbers to trick people, then shame on you for tricking me, because I sure as hell didn't feel like double checking the calculations.

EDIT- After attempting to read this last page of the thread I'd like to request a lock since it has changed into basically 2 stubborn yet intellectual people repeatedly arguing the same points against each other in order to try and get the other to back down.
I respect you both but this is unnecessary here, take it to SBR if necessary. And yes Yuna I know you don't require my respect but I give it to you anyways, so there.

Those who live in Italy don't forget to keep us posted on how this unfolds.

 

[Master Raven]

XIF do you seriously think MK has no even matchups? I can tell you from personal experience that Snake and Diddy go completely even vs MK (Snake's only disadvantage vs MK is that he's easily gimpable and most characters in the game can gimp the hell out of Snake. If he weren't so easily gimpable he might as well have been MK's 100% legit counter), and even Lucario and DK are arguable (also from personal experience fighting those two with MK).

I really do not think MK may not have any disadvantageous matchups at the moment, but we should not be so quick as to claim he has none yet, and if he doesn't, IIRC it is obviously not the first time we've dealt with a character with no bad matchups.

 

[XIF]

XIF do you seriously think MK has no even matchups? I can tell you from personal experience...

I don't care.

I'm referring to the scene as a whole here, so anyone's personal preference isn't really applicable.

 

[Joshu]

Look at those Metaknights dominated the top placements. It's sickening, is what it is.

My god that's horrible
I think I'm gonna output............

 

[Shears]

im not reading through this to see if someone already mentioned it but if so just ignore my post.

metaknight isnt invincible, however i will agree that he is the cheapest and best character in the game but he is beatable. snake and falco. snake has huge advantages over mk with his strength, projectiles, and range. he can wait for MK to approach and punish him but i dont think he is a counter, just an even match up or a slight advantage. falco i think is a metaknight counter. his lasers and reflector stop all of mks special moves, so tornado=grabage, drill rush=garbage, shuttle loop=garbage. his smashes KO better than all of MKs and they are only barely slower. many of his aerials beat mks upB and he has a fast and strong aerial game. to top it off he has a chaingrab that offers a free 50% that will catch him up if hes losing or set him far ahead if hes winning. this chaingrab leads into a meteor smash that wont kill mk right away, but with proper edguarding it can lead to a death for mk. his recovery isnt as gimpable as made out to be since they can save their second jump and use the forwardB to recover, proper DI and no falco will have to use his upB. game and watch and rob i feel are characters that go even with mk and if played smart and skilled enough will give any mk a struggle.

so invincible: no. no counters: no. no disadvantages: no. cheapest character in the game: yes. best matchups compared to the rest of the cast: yes. top tier: yes. should be banned: no (only the IDC). thats my opinion. when they figure out an infinite grab combo with mk then ill agree to ban him.

 

[Anther]

I like how people are selectively overlooking the fact of how alot of these people placing top with other characters are actually picking metaknight for certain matchups throughout the tournament.

I've never seen that at the tournaments where MK isn't listed as one of their mains then o_O.

This post isn't going to be the most linear after this point because of johns:

Anyways, in my opinion as the metagame currently is, a lot of characters can compete with MK, but just need to push a lil harder to get to the point where their game stands a chance against him. A lot of characters basic gameplay just to be able to compete is more complicated to get a mix-up game that rivals MK, and he has the advantage that he's decent even when you don't know what you're doing >.>.

A lot of people don't play their character's punishment games as effectively as I imagine they can be, and I actually do see quite a few characters do unexpectedly well against meta, and might only lose out because the meta actually just played a bit better.

This doesn't exactly change the fact that most regions best players play metaknight or the fact that a lot of the not best players play him, but my region has very few meta mains anyway, and most people that aren't obsessed with johning the matchups all over the place do just fine against mk. The only people that place well here with him also do well with other characters... except for the mk exclusive players of course.. but umm.. hmm.

Like others have said, he's good and probably better than most chars, but not broken. I'm just kinda glad people are exploring other good chars in my region and doing fine with them.

Anyways, I don't really care if yall disagree or if bitterness kills the tournament scenes. It's a fun and good game in my opinion and the mental game you play remains stronger in most matches than it ever did on both sides for melee matches. ... DDD breaks this rule a lot >.>.

Closing words, Pika's too sexy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKlUqwhcl0w

 

[Swordplay]

Good job Italy

I agree...Metaknight has no bad matchups. His matchups are at worse neautral.

I do not consider a neatural matchup a counter pick and if a character has no counterpicks then I agree he should be banned.

Out of all the bull**** reasoning you gave. This is the only part that stuck with me....The rest is just stupid and does not warrant an MK ban.


However.......1 Detailcan Make or break a ban/limit situation as we have learned from the SBR.