Metaknights' Even matchups? Open discussion

[Vex Kasrani]

And that's why your sig is your name with a ****** Yoshi

ASKLDJ AKLDJALKJDSIAJHDIU9WHT89W

Jk, but still. Wolf doesn't go even, go home be a family man.

 

[Fuujin]

I care about all the forest animals.

Chuee turn to fuse they're showing Lady Gaga videos for the next hour!

 

[Chuee]

Chuee turn to fuse they're showing Lady Gaga videos for the next hour!

lady gaga is a disgrace to society.

 

[Laem]

Looking at a set or two doesn't come close to determining a MU.

If that were the case people would say Fox beats MK based on TKD's past performance in the WC.

Can I semi-accurately judge the MK - Link MU after watching a set or two?

 

[Omni]

Not sure if trolling...

The point is that you can't accurately judge any kind of match-up based on just two sets. You have to look at variables like consistency over time, different players, different stages, etc.

 

[Deleted member]

Jk, but still. Wolf doesn't go even, go home be a family man.

Who said he goes even? Close to even is what I saw(then again I only read the last few pages). Even so, you shouldn't be negating Wolf from this discussion. He's not bad, dude.

Also, same applies to Fox. Both characters are capable of doing well vs. MK, but that doesn't mean it's an even matchup.

 

[Judo777]

@lance yea Ally totally knows the MK Snake MU. Thats why he chooses to play MK dittos instead cause hes not dumb.

And no Ally was never arguably the best player in the world UNTIL he picked MK...... he magically got better the exact instant he picked MK in tournament........it's not like he was arguably the best player with Snake and then lost due Snake having some bad MU's with MK, Olimar, (maybe wario?) and Marth.............................

 

[Seagull Joe]

Wolf is not even with Metaknight. The matchup is only a slight disadvantage for Wolf though, which is the same case for Fox and the rest.

 

[John12346]

Hence why I keep saying people are mistaking "not completely *****" for "even" or "advantage"

 

[DMG]

Slight disadvantage =/= even

and I assume this thread is about finding people that go 5:5 or even 55:45. Of those characters like Wolf, hell no.

 

[Chuee]

And no Ally was never arguably the best player in the world UNTIL he picked MK...... he magically got better the exact instant he picked MK in tournament........it's not like he was arguably the best player with Snake and then lost due Snake having some bad MU's with MK, Olimar, (maybe wario?) and Marth.............................

Actually, for a short period he was considered the best in NA. I'm pretty sure he used to consistently beat M2K for a few month period about 2-3 years ago and win most nationals.

 

[Judo777]

Actually, for a short period he was considered the best in NA. I'm pretty sure he used to consistently beat M2K for a few month period about 2-3 years ago and win most nationals.

I'm talkin recent.

 

[Tagxy]

You said Ally was never the best player in NA until he picked up MK, which is false. Last year he was consistently beating m2k up until mlg.

Lets say someone else and myself play each other all the time. We will say that I play someone like Snake and my friend plays MK. Snake doesn't get decimated by MK but i think he loses. Assuming we are both not new to the game if we play each other and I consistently win its an obvious indication that I am the better player at the moment. Now if I am the ONLY Snake that my friend ever plays do you think he will surpass me anytime soon? Chances are he won't everytime he plays me and learns the MU, I also learn the MU for MK and get better. We are getting better at the MU at the same rate (this is of course ideally). If he were to surpass me overtime I feel that would be an indication in the MU slanting in his favor.

Same goes with ESAM. ESAM is the ONLY top level pikachu Seibrek really plays. Every single time Seibrek plays ESAM and gets better at the MU, ESAM gets better at the MK MU too (he probably learned a good majority of the MU from Seibrek). Combine that with the fact that ESAM has probably played tons and tons of good MK's in tournament, ESAM is always getting smarter at the MU and learning it from different angles (as each MK plays different). I think its a very safe assumption to say that ESAM has played the Pika MK MU quite a bit more than Seibrek has and therefore he probably knows it better.

Tyrant may spend a lot of time studying the Fox MU. But I bet he didn't study the Fox MU like crazy when he was first learning the game. I bet when TKD was first learning the game he was studying the MK MU like most all of us have. I bet TKD still studies that MU to this day. I bet TKD has a very very large gap in the amount of time he has spent playing against MK with Fox than Tyrant has against Fox with MK. Has Tyrant gone to (wherever he lives) to play Zeton or Trevant to learn the MU? Cause I know countless people who travel to go play top lvl MKs. I think the second best player where TKD is from plays MK. I bet they have played alot.

Until I see that I don't buy it.

rofl, no offense but this is a pretty bad analogy. First of all your example with ESAM works agains your point since ESAM went from losing to Seibrek to going even to beating him consistently. By your logic guess Pikachu beats metaknight

Secondly learning MUs has a saturation point or limiting returns. The game doesnt magically invent moves and tactics as we keep playing it, at some point you either know what a characters tools are or you dont. Any further progress is through player skill and knowledge of your opponent, not characters.

Lastly you have no way to prove your argument one way or another. People are always going to have more MU experience against the most popular character in the game, so asking anyone to prove the opposite or believing your argument is affirmed by lack of such proof is poopoo.

If I missed any nationals in 2011, let me know.

KTAR 4 - http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=295749 - 3 MKs in Top 8
Pound 5 - http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=298137 - 3 MKs in Top 8
WHOBO 3 - http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=300010 - 4 MKs in Top 8

In all 3 tournies, MK also took first.

What was that about highest level of play?

KTAR was not a national, and in any case 3 MKs in the top 8 doesnt really support your argument since they did not win. And saying MK took first in the other two is disingenuous, since non-mk characters were essential to that first place win.

 

[Tin Man]

Match ups can be a controversial issue. Finding the difference in player skill or a bad match up can sometimes be difficult. A lot of what Omni has been saying is true.

 

[Laem]

A lot of what Omni has been saying is incredibly obvious.
Basically we'll never amount to anything, until there's "metagame development" after which we'll never amount to anything.

Alternatively you can look at a set (I watched the recent ones (sorry for that), see fox above MK desperately trying to avoid getting hit and cringe at the sight of his aerial mobility.

 

[DMG]

There's no point in all of this.

There, beat THAT.

 

[Judo777]

You said Ally was never the best player in NA until he picked up MK, which is false. Last year he was consistently beating m2k up until mlg.

rofl, no offense but this is a pretty bad analogy. First of all your example with ESAM works agains your point since ESAM went from losing to Seibrek to going even to beating him consistently. By your logic guess Pikachu beats metaknight

Secondly learning MUs has a saturation point or limiting returns. The game doesnt magically invent moves and tactics as we keep playing it, at some point you either know what a characters tools are or you dont. Any further progress is through player skill and knowledge of your opponent, not characters.

Lastly you have no way to prove your argument one way or another. People are always going to have more MU experience against the most popular character in the game, so asking anyone to prove the opposite or believing your argument is affirmed by lack of such proof is poopoo.


KTAR was not a national, and in any case 3 MKs in the top 8 doesnt really support your argument since they did not win. And saying MK took first in the other two is disingenuous, since non-mk characters were essential to that first place win.

Umm NO ESAM's example DOES NOT prove my point worng. I find it hard to believe that I put a qualifying condition on my analogy AND made it CAPS to make it easier to see and yet you still somehow overlooked it. IF I WAS THE ONLY SNAKE HE EVER PLAYED....................... is seibrek the only MK that ESAM plays? If so then ESAM must never place high out of state because there are almost always MKs in top 8 in every region.

And BS at some point you can no longer learn aspects of a MU that are based around the character. NO ONE understands every aspect of any given MU. This game (and just about any other game) are way too complex for anyone to understand every single aspect of it. It can be as simple as understanding that if you stand an arbitrary distance away (maybe like exactly 4 steps away they lose some option that is present at every other distance) you never know and to pretend you can or that people aren't always learning more about a MU concerning character aspects is stupid.

I guess Seibrek shares the same luxury, he probably plays at least 6 pikachus every tournament he goes to.....................

 

[DMG]

What am I reading

 

[etecoon]

WTF at people mentioning wario in this topic

this topic is making me sad

 

[Tagxy]

Umm NO ESAM's example DOES NOT prove my point worng. I find it hard to believe that I put a qualifying condition on my analogy AND made it CAPS to make it easier to see and yet you still somehow overlooked it. IF I WAS THE ONLY SNAKE HE EVER PLAYED....................... is seibrek the only MK that ESAM plays? If so then ESAM must never place high out of state because there are almost always MKs in top 8 in every region.

The qualifying condition doesnt matter, in fact its not really a qualifier at all since the two explanations work indepedantly, and one is clearly better than the other.

I guess Seibrek shares the same luxury, he probably plays at least 6 pikachus every tournament he goes to.....................

As already mentioned in this thread the key word is high level. At the very least youd need multiple high level metaknights you could play consistently, considering the proportion ESAM has been able to play seibrek vs other MKs it becomes negligible.

Of course even that is assuming that if youre playing MK twice as much you know the character twice as well, the problem is at some point returns diminish on how well you can know a character and your gains essentially flatline.

And BS at some point you can no longer learn aspects of a MU that are based around the character. NO ONE understands every aspect of any given MU. This game (and just about any other game) are way too complex for anyone to understand every single aspect of it. It can be as simple as understanding that if you stand an arbitrary distance away (maybe like exactly 4 steps away they lose some option that is present at every other distance) you never know and to pretend you can or that people aren't always learning more about a MU concerning character aspects is stupid.

Your argument that theres more to learn about characters is that we might not know about spacing xD? Theres something to be said for evolving strategies allowing the metagame to constantly evolve, but characters don't evolve. I mean maybe theres something obscure, but its rare that anything game changing might exist.

 

[Judo777]

The qualifying condition doesnt matter, in fact its not really a qualifier at all since the two explanations work indepedantly, and one is clearly better than the other.

As already mentioned in this thread the key word is high level. At the very least youd need multiple high level metaknights you could play consistently, considering the proportion ESAM has been able to play seibrek vs other MKs it becomes negligible.

Of course even that is assuming that if youre playing MK twice as much you know the character twice as well, the problem is at some point returns diminish on how well you can know a character and your gains essentially flatline.

Your argument that theres more to learn about characters is that we might not know about spacing xD? Theres something to be said for evolving strategies allowing the metagame to constantly evolve, but characters don't evolve. I mean maybe theres something obscure, but its rare that anything game changing might exist.

No the two arguments aren't independent. The argument about not learning the MU better than someone who you play all the time was stated with that exact qualifier. If the qualifier is not present then you can't use whats stated after the qualifier.

You don't have to play an MK a whole lot more than the one your used to. So your telling me that you don't learn new things every time you play the game? If I play a luigi (like my buddy crash) all the time to where I have a good feel for the MU, then play both boss and big lou in tourney (which heavily factored into why i did as well as i did) it gives me a whole new perspective on the MU. I got to play someone who thinks differently and acts differently with the same character. I would be willing to be that ESAM would admit he has learned a whole lot about the MK MU from other MK's like Tyrant.

You can't honestly try and convince me that ESAM doesn't know the MK Pika MU better than Seibrek simply because he plays it a whole lot more. Seibrek doesn't get to see the MU get played differently from different Pikas cause there aren't any others at that level.

And please tell me you aren't serious about the question you asked regarding they don't know the MU because of spacing???? It was quite obviously an example to demonstrate that there are lots of very non obvious apsects to MU that can be quite important.

 

[Tagxy]

No the two arguments aren't independent. The argument about not learning the MU better than someone who you play all the time was stated with that exact qualifier. If the qualifier is not present then you can't use whats stated after the qualifier.

You gain skill from playing your consistent opponent. You gain skill from playing a different opponent. They are independent factors, one doesn't depend on the other. One does improve your skill more than the other, especially as the ratio of the first greatly increases over the second.

You don't have to play an MK a whole lot more than the one your used to. So your telling me that you don't learn new things every time you play the game? If I play a luigi (like my buddy crash) all the time to where I have a good feel for the MU, then play both boss and big lou in tourney (which heavily factored into why i did as well as i did) it gives me a whole new perspective on the MU. I got to play someone who thinks differently and acts differently with the same character. I would be willing to be that ESAM would admit he has learned a whole lot about the MK MU from other MK's like Tyrant.

A little more about MK? Maaaaaybe. A whole lot more? Doubtful. Did he learn alot about tyrant as an MK player. Very likely yes. Also your analogy with luigi doesnt work in reverse (assuming the luigi player is lesser skilled).

You can't honestly try and convince me that ESAM doesn't know the MK Pika MU better than Seibrek simply because he plays it a whole lot more. Seibrek doesn't get to see the MU get played differently from different Pikas cause there aren't any others at that level.

I think your overrating this different perspectives thing in regards to how much you learn about a character itself.

And please tell me you aren't serious about the question you asked regarding they don't know the MU because of spacing???? It was quite obviously an example to demonstrate that there are lots of very non obvious apsects to MU that can be quite important.

non obvious? likely. Quite important? very unlikely.

 

[Judo777]

You gain skill from playing your consistent opponent. You gain skill from playing a different opponent. They are independent factors, one doesn't depend on the other. One does improve your skill more than the other, especially as the ratio of the first greatly increases over the second.

A little more about MK? Maaaaaybe. A whole lot more? Doubtful. Did he learn alot about tyrant as an MK player. Very likely yes. Also your analogy with luigi doesnt work in reverse (assuming the luigi player is lesser skilled).

I think your overrating this different perspectives thing in regards to how much you learn about a character itself.

non obvious? likely. Quite important? very unlikely.

I wanna know on what basis you argument concerning that ratio was founded on. You learn more by playing one player individually more so than playing the same amount of time divided amoungst multiple players? How are you sure about that. Also I actually think thats wrong if thats what ur saying. I think if I spent 3 days playing 7 MKs and you spent 3 days playing the same one I would get a better feel for the MU.

Also how can you distinguish if an aspect of the MU is related to the character or the player? Perhaps as Snake I think a huge part of the MK MU is falling backwards to the ground with a grenade plucked at an MK because the person I play with always falls for that one. Then I come later to find out that actually that's not always a safe option (hardly ever is it)

And the luigi analogy if very related to this situation. I have a much better outlook on the MU from playing boss and big lou than i did just playing crash. Idk if your trying to say it doesn't apply or its not true but neither of those are the case.

I don't think I'm overrating it at all. I think its one of the most important reasons for people to travel. Even people from the strongest regions still travel and I think its a large factor for it. Do you think M2K might have benefited from playing GNES in Texas instead of just sticking around and playing ADHD all the time? I think most people would agree with me on this idea.

And some of the most important aspects to certain MU's aren't or seem like tiny details. One obvious one is that characters (especially falco and peach) shouldn't jump about 1/3 distance of FD away from sheik. She gets kills for that. How about luigi's standing right in front of banana (between diddy and the banana) while fighting diddy to prevent getting punish on shield slide? What about Snake positioning himself in such a way that when he gets caught by nado the nade drops the direction MK will be moving instead of away or the reverse of MK scooping Snake with nado the opposite direction the nade is on.

Those are all very tiny and not necessarily obvious things that can be a very important factor in a MU. And besides who cares if it's not even huge when the matches are close every little thing matters.

 

[Tagxy]

I wanna know on what basis you argument concerning that ratio was founded on. You learn more by playing one player individually more so than playing the same amount of time divided amoungst multiple players? How are you sure about that. Also I actually think thats wrong if thats what ur saying. I think if I spent 3 days playing 7 MKs and you spent 3 days playing the same one I would get a better feel for the MU.

The ratio was specific, the amount of time people spend playing local players is considerably greater than what they spend playing at nationals, especially in ESAMs case.

Also how can you distinguish if an aspect of the MU is related to the character or the player? Perhaps as Snake I think a huge part of the MK MU is falling backwards to the ground with a grenade plucked at an MK because the person I play with always falls for that one. Then I come later to find out that actually that's not always a safe option (hardly ever is it)

A character is defined by their characteristics and capabilities, the player by how they use them.

And the luigi analogy if very related to this situation. I have a much better outlook on the MU from playing boss and big lou than i did just playing crash. Idk if your trying to say it doesn't apply or its not true but neither of those are the case.

I mean you dont learn much if you play the best luigis then move onto lower level players. Of course you will learn more when you play a high level player if you have not before.

I don't think I'm overrating it at all. I think its one of the most important reasons for people to travel. Even people from the strongest regions still travel and I think its a large factor for it. Do you think M2K might have benefited from playing GNES in Texas instead of just sticking around and playing ADHD all the time? I think most people would agree with me on this idea.

People travel to meet and play players and their styles. And Im not saying its completely irrelevant to learning more about a character, but its not that significant.

And some of the most important aspects to certain MU's aren't or seem like tiny details. One obvious one is that characters (especially falco and peach) shouldn't jump about 1/3 distance of FD away from sheik. She gets kills for that. How about luigi's standing right in front of banana (between diddy and the banana) while fighting diddy to prevent getting punish on shield slide? What about Snake positioning himself in such a way that when he gets caught by nado the nade drops the direction MK will be moving instead of away or the reverse of MK scooping Snake with nado the opposite direction the nade is on.

Those are all very tiny and not necessarily obvious things that can be a very important factor in a MU. And besides who cares if it's not even huge when the matches are close every little thing matters.

I meant anything new, not what already exists.

 

[Judo777]

The ratio was specific, the amount of time people spend playing local players is considerably greater than what they spend playing at nationals, especially in ESAMs case.

A character is defined by their characteristics and capabilities, the player by how they use them.

I mean you dont learn much if you play the best luigis then move onto lower level players. Of course you will learn more when you play a high level player if you have not before.


People travel to meet and play players and their styles. And Im not saying its completely irrelevant to learning more about a character, but its not that significant.


I meant anything new, not what already exists.

Of course ESAM has spent more time playing locals. But that doesn't mean he doesn't learn alot from playing people out of state also. So now is your argument simply that ESAM doesn't learn much because he doesn't play out of state players often enough? Because if so I want to know what the minimum amount of time necessary to learn something important in a MU is? To me that sounds arbitrary and I don't see why especially with as much as ESAM has played other MK's that he hasn't learned alot more.

I don't like that argument. That's like saying peaches ability to float isn't a part of her dair they are seperate when a large strength of her dair is that she can float while doing it. So now random question. Lets pretend that I discovered that floating with peach dair facing backwards was extremely useful is say the Snake MU and I therefore used it alot. Would that be a character trait, or my specific style?

And you can't call me on this. I already told you I learned a freaking ton from playing Big Lou and Boss. My buddy crash even mentioned that I had learned quite a few things from playing them so you can't really argue that one.

How can you put a value on how significant any amount of experience is? Every little bit counts. If it weren't significant why would people waste their money traveling? I'm not even referring to going to tournaments. I'm talking about people traveling to play M2K for a day and saying they learned a ton about the game in that small amount of time (which I'm fairly certain several of the top MK's did this).

And so you telling me that everything similar to that obscure stuff i named has already been discovered? Because if not then learning those small non-obvious aspects of MU's is still important.

 

[NickRiddle]

Guys, guys, calm down.
It's Seibrik.
There is one I.
It's Kirbies backwards.

 

[Toronto Joe]

Mind=blown

 

[Judo777]

Guys, guys, calm down.
It's Seibrik.
There is one I.
It's Kirbies backwards.

Woah no way lol thats awesome!

 

[Sensei Seibrik]

well technically... it's two I's


Seibrik.....


yay for finally being able to namesearch this, thanks nick

 

[Life]

MY MIND IS BLOWN (o_o)

 

[cHp]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2jUhnCU9iA

 

[Chuee]

SEIBRIK IS KIRBIES BACKWARDS?!?!?!?!?!?!
my whole life is a lie.

 

[Tarmogoyf]

Guys, guys, calm down.
It's Seibrik.
There is one I.
It's Kirbies backwards.

****

My

Life

 

[t3h Icy]

Guys, guys, calm down.
It's Seibrik.
There is one I.
It's Kirbies backwards.

Is that related to why he started with DDD?

 

[B.A.M.]

As I said, Tyrant plays fox himself. You can get better playing other ppl who main that said character sure. If you PLAY the character though, then you can figure out what that character can do. And no matter what happens, a player can only do what the system allows him to.

There are ways to learn the match up without having to play multiple mains. Ill tell you right now Tyrant probably has a top level Fox. Im not trying to convince you; I cant. Thats all you.

All i know is getting proficient with a character is the best way to understand what a character can do. Besides you're acting like all these other MK's are doing stuff radically different. Which isnt the case. If you fight a MK with proper execution, then you know what to do vs an MK with bad execution. If you've played MK or tried him out you would know what he can do. I mean seriously, you think other MKs are teaching Esam something incredibly new that hes never seen? I highly doubt that. Esam play Seibrik; who is a top MK who knows the Pika matchup, theres VERY little that Esam is gonna gain from lesser MKs who dont know the match up, that Seibrik didnt already teach him from playing one another. But guess what? Same stands for Seibrik.

Theres only so much a character can do. Put it this way:

Would TKD's MK own most (if not all) Foxes? I believe we could both say yes most likely.
Now why would that be? Its not like he PLAYS a ton of Foxes for experience? its because he doesnt have to. The character can only perform what the system allows.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-yKEeh70R8&feature=mh_lolz&list=WL361CE240E74D796E

basically what hes saying when it comes to characters. If you know how to counter MK's moveset to the best of your characters ability, then you know the MK match up. Mindgames blah blah are just player based. You dont need to travel all these places to know these things. Its not like people have different versions with radically new moves and frame data.

 

[EpixAura]

Guys, guys, calm down.
It's Seibrik.
There is one I.
It's Kirbies backwards.

I, too, would like to stop by here and marvel at this wonder in a cheap attempt to get my post count up.
But seriously, why did I never notice this before?

 

[Sensei Seibrik]

Is that related to why he started with DDD?

actually it's related to why i started with KIRBY


and only mained (tru mained) characters from the kirby games


kirby->ddd->mk

 

[MJG]

Guys, guys, calm down.
It's Seibrik.
There is one I.
It's Kirbies backwards.

Wh at

 

[Laem]

I knew this delicate intel already.
But..
Why plural?
The legend of Seibrik

 

[san.]

Surprised people didn't know this.

Maharba backwards is Abraham OMG!!!

Spoiler

DRACULA = !!!
GIRAFARIG OMG

Ontopic: I use MK vs people sometimes in friendlies and my previous thoughts remain.