Official BBR Tier List v7

[Osennecho]

No, if 100 top players entered as Ganon against 25 top players entering as MK, the MK players would still win. He is popular because he is ban-worthy good, and it's illogical to pick any other character if you are playing to win.

Could you use a realistic example please? Your entire bunch of posts are garbage and flawed. You use statistical data that doesn't account for statistical bias. Way to go Mr. Math genius. Then I point out the most blatant source of bias and you use an even more biased argument. I'd probably vomit if I argued this with you in real life due to how blatantly stupid your posts are. *Edit *Removed* Edit* If M2K/Otori/Dojo/other talented MK users didn't choose to main MK do you think they would not be able to compete at high level if they wanted to with a different character?.... The point is that top players chose MK. If more top players had picked a different character obviously the winnings of that character would rise and MK would drop assuming the character was still say B tier or higher. It follows simple logic. You do have some truth to what you are saying though. It is easiest to "win with MK."

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

Positions on the MK ban debate (an analogy)

Anti-ban: I like Vanilla Ice cream better!
Pro-ban: Well, since most people like chocolate Ice cream better, you're an idiot!

 

[infiniteV115]

That was the worst analogy ever. Whether or not a character should be legal in competitive gaming (which involves the handling of people's money) is not simply a matter of personal preference.

 

[B0NK]

Could you use a realistic example please? Your entire bunch of posts are garbage and flawed. You use statistical data that doesn't account for statistical bias. Way to go Mr. Math genius. Then I point out the most blatant source of bias and you use an even more biased argument.

I was showing that to prove that no other character would dominate and over-centralize even close to what MK does now, we would need more MK-banned events. Early MK-banned events have shown that no other character is nearly as close to MK dominancy, but we need more data to prove that.

The data is out there for the public, and the public as a majority has agreed that MK is ban-worthy. The data is completely un-bias in that MK makes more money and has more success over the rest of the cast.

I'd probably vomit if I argued this with you in real life due to how blatantly stupid your posts/you are. It's like arguing over gun control against someone without any knowledge on the matter.

This is an analogy fallacy, and the MK-ban discussion has nothing to do with gun control. Gun control is a shaky issue because of the deep ethical philosophies that support both sides, and the fact that the constitution in which our laws are based on is unclear on this issue. Let's not bring up gun control.

If M2K/Otori/Dojo/other talented MK users didn't choose to main MK do you think they would not be able to compete at high level if they wanted to with a different character?

Some would, some wouldn't, it depends on how good they are at playing an MK-banned game. Rather watch that then watch to see who's the best with MK like we do now.

The point is that top players chose MK. If more top players had picked a different character obviously the winnings of that character would rise and MK would drop assuming the character was still say B tier or higher. It follows simple logic.

We cannot prove this without MK-banned events. I believe no other character would have nearly as much dominance as MK does, because there is no longer a clear best character for all top players to choose when MK is gone.


The data right now clearly shows that MK is over-centralizing at all levels of play, and that means he is therefore ban-worthy. If another character was to show this same trend with MK gone, then MK would be shown not to be any more ban-worthy then another top character. We still need MK-banned events to show this, and I believe that we would never see a character as dominant as MK in MK-banned events.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

You do not have majority opinion's interpretation of the data. MK has a huge margin of success, holding over 50% of the money made in tourney. (This would not change drastically if you took out pot bonuses). He is also the more popular choice of character by a large margin. This shows he is over-centralizing the metagame, and it's effects are clearly negative. For these reason, MK is ban-worthy. And the majority of the community agrees.

He is not banned at most events now because TOs are only hosting tourneys for themselves and their MK-maining friends. If they were to hold polls like I suggest, they would be able to hold tourneys more people would be happy with.

Your definition of overcentralizing might be different from Anti ban's definition of overcentralizing

 

[B0NK]

Either way, your opinion of over-centralizing is not the majority opinion. A poll allows TOs to host the ruleset that makes their community happiest.

The majority believe after looking at the data, evidence, and arguments that MK is over-centralizing and ban-worthy.

What is your definition of over-centralizing, Jebus?

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

That was the worst analogy ever. Whether or not a character should be legal in competitive gaming (which involves the handling of people's money) is not simply a matter of personal preference.

I didn't say it was an analogy of the issue, I said it's an analogy of the debate

Also I just wanted to mention Ice Cream

 

[SaveMeJebus]

70% or more of all players using MK.

 

[Coney]

does anyone else think it's WAY too late to talk about this now

 

[B0NK]

Doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't talk about it, whether it will change anything or not.

All I would like to see changed is that TOs use polls for attendees to decide rulesets, making more attendees happier and better for business.

Not talking about it would mean this may never be a reality.

 

[-LzR-]

does anyone else think it's WAY too late to talk about this now

The window where it was neither too early or too late to ban MK was smaller than the window to punish any of the bull**** the character does.

 

[B0NK]

70% or more of all players using MK.

Because he is ban-worthy good, and it's not logical to pick other characters if you're playing to win.

If MK was banned, I'm sure no other character would prove to be as dominant and over-centralizing. To prove this we need more MK-banned events.

To start providing more MK-banned events I suggested attendee polls be the deciding factor as to what ruleset a TO host.

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

does anyone else think it's WAY too late to talk about this now

The window where it was neither too early or too late to ban MK was smaller than the window to punish any of the bull**** the character does.

neither too early nor too late
sorry, that error (as well as who/whom) really bugs me

 

[-LzR-]

I actually can't even say who would be the number 1 in the MK banned metagame, there is nothing even close to being as good as MK, though MK is just barely too much better than the rest.

@Shiny Mewtwo:
Now I feel so bad I wonder why I ever said anything ever

 

[Coney]

i agree that we can get some kind of precedence to come out of this maybe, like polls determining rulesets or establishing some kind of understanding for smash 4's roster (god forbid we have another fiasco like this)

maybe i'm wrong because i'm just an outsider looking in, but it seems like the mk ban is a moot point now, the damage has been done and the community's in a pretty irreparable state...anti-ban won and the window's closed

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

does anyone else think it's WAY too late to talk about this now

So wait, when was the window? Because during the poll that eventually banned him, there were still people claiming it was too early.

 

[-LzR-]

i agree that we can get some kind of precedence to come out of this maybe, like polls determining rulesets or establishing some kind of understanding for smash 4's roster (god forbid we have another fiasco like this)

maybe i'm wrong because i'm just an outsider looking in, but it seems like the mk ban is a moot point now, the damage has been done and the community's in a pretty irreparable state...anti-ban won and the window's closed

You are totally correct about this, as crappy as it sounds...

 

[B0NK]

Anti-ban won through means that have no basis in data, or evidence, or even majority opinion, yes.

It's a moot point, but it should still be discussed in hope of achieving, like you said, some precedent for TOs and for Smash 4's rulesets.

 

[Osennecho]

Doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't talk about it, whether it will change anything or not.
All I would like to see changed is that TOs use polls for attendees to decide rulesets, making more attendees happier and better for business.
Not talking about it would mean this may never be a reality.

Then what. Restrict who can vote in those polls to those who have placed high/know what they are talking about? The polls also contained statistical bias in that scrubs will favor banning him more often than not. Remove top players best character = lower level of opponents. A fundamental issue with the polls was that they weren't neutral. And then most MKs will vote not to ban or will they not be allowed to vote? I main Marth and second Puff and have used her at tournaments. Hmmm sounds tempting to vote to ban some of my worst match ups. Would I? Probably not. I use Puff after all. What do I care about high tier characters.
And to implement MK banned tournaments to get statistical evidence as to whether a different character would centralize the meta would require at least a year to advance that new meta for it to not be utterly horrible. So it's pointless and I'm done. Back to college work/yelling at Engineering problems when they don't go how they are supposed to.

Anti-ban won through means that have no basis in data, or evidence, or even majority opinion, yes.

It's a moot point, but it should still be discussed in hope of achieving, like you said, some precedent for TOs and for Smash 4's rulesets.

Saw this right as I was leaving... This makes more sense then your previous points. To try to discuss if some % of $/tournaments was won by one character in the first year of Smash 4 should it be banned. Yet what if that character was already taken close to it's full potential and others weren't/the meta would have changed. Now if the % was say two-thirds... That would make sense and be ban worthy even if the meta were to change. But if this is your argument why isn't it smash 4's forum. (You'd have more ground IMO despite it being a what if)

 

[-LzR-]

You are doing exactly what B0NK said, favoring the top level MKs because they want to win with their MK, while ignoring the scrubs who are also as important to the scene as the good ones.

 

[B0NK]

No restriction in the polls and who can vote. There were MK mains who voted to ban him, and their were non-MK mains who voted to keep him legal. Who they main does effect their decision but isn't the only factor.

Putting no restrictions on polls means a more happy community, and one that has some sort of objective basis. Majority opinion may not always be right, but it'll always lead to the happier community.

We had two polls during the last final decision, one was all with a Smashboard's account could vote. (75% favored banning MK). The other vote was between TOs in Unity that showed 2/3 majority that TOs in Unity agreed MK should be banned.

The only restriction I would put in place on a poll for a TOs ruleset is that you must be planning to attend the tourney. This can be done by either trusting those who say that are attending the tourney, or simply pre-registration in advance.

But if there was no restriction, I would be happy with that too. Better than having no polls.

 

[Coney]

i mean i'm in agreement that anti-ban's argument was bull****, i'm not saying it's too late to ban him now because of any kind of respect for the metagame or anything

i think it actually IS too late because of the community. i don't know how it is for other regions but the "middle class" of players completely bottomed out in most places, and a lot of top players also moved on. it may just be a natural thing for fighters, i don't know because i don't have any reference, but now it just feels too late to ban him in hopes of revitalizing a wounded community

people have either adapted or died out. the "brawl backroom" (or whatever you want to call the amorphous hivemind that decided he should stay) has erected an ecosystem that supports MK. we can complain and say what should have been done but from an outsider's perspective, it just seems...over

most people will come back for smash 4 regardless. if you really care, just take this as a learning lesson and become a driving force in your community when that comes out and try to establish change early, nothing's going to change in brawl

 

[Coney]

as a side note and completely candidly

it's silly of me, but what KILLS me is that i have this instinct that a lot of the decisions made along brawl's lifespan were made to accommodate not a community, not even a character's entire playerbase, but ONE PERSON

 

[B0NK]

I agree, Coney.

I never believe he will be completely banned at this point. I just believe that we should still be allowed to discuss the subject, like you said earlier.

I also miss having the TO poll for rulesets before a tourney in some NY/NJ tournaments that are now gone because the TO is not hosting MK-Banned events for personal bias reasons.

I believe TO polls for the attendees are the answer for a happier community, and hope to see this change in Smash 4. (I also hope we can at least start doing this now in order to set a precedent).

 

[Dekillsage]

does anyone else think it's WAY too late to talk about this now

You're right time to quit

 

[Coney]

well ont he plus side, at least people can talk about it now

remember the times when the thread would get locked and people infracted for talking about the mk ban? that's some big brother draconian **** right there

 

[B0NK]

I remember and thought that was completely unethical.

Big Brother Draconian **** = Completely Unethical.

 

[Jabejazz]

They probably just know we can't do **** about it anymore since the game will most likely die when Smash 4 comes out.
Hopefully people stand up and call out the TOs' bull**** when ****s hit the fan.

P.S. : **** hits the fan when MK bodies everyone everywhere for free.

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

as a side note and completely candidly

it's silly of me, but what KILLS me is that i have this instinct that a lot of the decisions made along brawl's lifespan were made to accommodate not a community, not even a character's entire playerbase, but ONE PERSON

Now I want to go through every decision made by this community, from banning items to not banning MK, and figure out what one person the decision was made to accommodate.

But then I realize that it's a waste of time and I have much better things to do

 

[-LzR-]

Items are not banned, they are simply turned off.

 

[Coney]

well i should rephrase, a lot of the decisions centered around the mk debate

there was a long time way back when, mk mains were told they might have to pick up new characters...the mid-levels cried out, but most of the top-level MKs you can name even today proceeded to win/place top 3 at tournaments in regions with different characters. most of them, anyway...

and it's just my opinion and probably holds no water, but i'll hold to it just the same

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

there was a long time way back when, mk mains were told they might have to pick up new characters...the mid-levels cried out, but most of the top-level MKs you can name even today proceeded to win/place top 3 at tournaments in regions with different characters. most of them, anyway...

Hmm, just from the top of my head there's Anti, Nairo, Ally, Rain, Kakera, Dojo, FOW, Nakat, Holynightmare, and Seibrik that have shown that they can still compete in an MK banned environment or are known to have a very high level secondary/former main.

And the only ones that haven't (to my knowledge) are M2K, Tyrant, and ZeRo and Otori.

 

[Coney]

 

[B0NK]

Tyrant can compete without MK in his region IIRC. On a national scale? I refer to Coney's post above for any of the players you've named.

 

[Shiny Mewtwo aka Jigglysir]

Tyrant can compete without MK in his region IIRC. On a national scale? I refer to Coney's post above for any of the players you've named.

I refer to Coney's post above for any of the players you've named.

any of the players you've named.

any

Ally

Also Seibrik got 9th at WHOBO and Holy got 7th at Impulse, which is probably around where they would have placed if MK was allowed (Seeing as I never said they would be national threats, just that their placements wouldn't be lowered by a huge amount)

 

[B0NK]

Looking at the image above it seems like I said nothing about Ally or any of the players for that matter

 

[SaveMeJebus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14cs6rSta8c&t=19m17s

Remove the LGL!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Angiance]

Meta Knight is so awesome, that no one wants to ban him. Sakurai is an evil, evil man for making Meta Knight more cool than the A/C in a car...he's even cooler than the Ice Climbers.

 

[infiniteV115]

To be fair, Ally was unaware that there was no LGL at that tournament. As soon as he was informed, he realized it was too late and jumped off.
(Trust me. I was the dude in the red hoodie in the player cam next to Player-1)

 

[GalaxyWaffles]

Do not tell me what to do space breakfast. Stay bad.

The opinion of peasants are invalid, sorry.

P.S nobody likes seagulls