Official Metaknight Discussion

[Overswarm]

So since Omni gave up, who wants to step up and address the points he's evaded?

 

[adumbrodeus]

stuff

You're totally wrong here, EVERY game has an optimal strategy, period. It may be difficult to figure out what the optimal strategy is, but every game has a strategy that is the best (with the possible exception of glorified coin flips which are arguable), if only by the barest of margins, ex. SF4, pick Sagat, zone with tiger shot. Halo 1, use pistol, etc.


What successful competative games DO NOT have is a strategy that will work every time regardless of the opponent's actions.


The thing is you used optimal to mean both "best" and "works regardless of the opponent's actions" when it suited you, because you only proved metaknight was the best strategy, but at the same time, the opposing examples HAD a best strategy, but not one that works regardless of the opponent's actions. What you could argue is that MK is a reletively better strategy (and I would agree with starcraft, the optimal strategy is continuously changed by patches and usually only holds a very slight advantage over some lesser strategies).




Secondly, there STILL is no clear rigid criteria, and while I recognize this was more RDK's question then Omni's, it's a great deal more relevant, and since you heavily explained it, it was worth adding your actual conclusion to your long essay about what should be a ban suspect.

Maybe the tension is caused because of a False Dilemma we're working with.


There are three possibilities:


MK is broken and should be banned.
MK is not broken.
MK is broken and Brawl sucks because it is broken.


We should remember that that third scenario is on the table. It's not one you like to have, but Sirlin leaves room for that: Maybe there is an option that dominates... but the game without that option isn't ten times better than the one with it.

When that happens, you should abandon the game, because it's not a good competition. It's an arms race of minutiae regarding the dominant option.

(EDIT: Wow, forgot my sentence. <_< )



I really don't want to believe it's the case, so I keep trying to get better, learn to read and pressure, and beat MK's options, but, it just occurred to me that the stress and the 'divisiveness' people feel, yet without believing that it's simply a disagreement, could be put up to this.

If we're in that scenario, then we're all wrong, and we're all screwed. Melee haters were right (though for the wrong reasons): Brawl can't be played.


Maybe we can get somewhere if we throw out this assumption people have been making. (I think it's been assumed). That this third possibility doesn't exist.


EDIT2: No one is ever going to see this post. :'(

That is a good post, and unfortunately, it IS a legitimate possibility.

So since Omni gave up, who wants to step up and address the points he's evaded?

IF you wanna link them I'll answer what I'm interested in answering (remember my POV on this is mainly based on statutory grounds). I already have a present for you in this post.

 

[Justblaze647]

no, im saying you have one of the smartest smashers in the history of the gaming SERIES doing everything he can to find a high class winning methodology to his character. Yeah he will be good, and once other players of the same character catch on it will seem like its the character's fault not the people who are doing the work with him.

So you're saying its the players, and not MK, that are being dominant?

Obviously you know nothing about Brawl, and you should gtfo, as I previously suggested.

 

[Ganonsburg]

Maybe the tension is caused because of a False Dilemma we're working with.


There are three possibilities:


MK is broken and should be banned.
MK is not broken.
MK is broken and Brawl sucks because it is broken.


We should remember that that third scenario is on the table. It's not one you like to have, but Sirlin leaves room for that: Maybe there is an option that dominates... but the game without that option isn't ten times better than the one with it.

When that happens, you should abandon the game, because it's not a good competition. It's an arms race of minutiae regarding the dominant option.

(EDIT: Wow, forgot my sentence. <_< )



I really don't want to believe it's the case, so I keep trying to get better, learn to read and pressure, and beat MK's options, but, it just occurred to me that the stress and the 'divisiveness' people feel, yet without believing that it's simply a disagreement, could be put up to this.

If we're in that scenario, then we're all wrong, and we're all screwed. Melee haters were right (though for the wrong reasons): Brawl can't be played.


Maybe we can get somewhere if we throw out this assumption people have been making. (I think it's been assumed). That this third possibility doesn't exist.


EDIT2: No one is ever going to see this post. :'(

Bumping because PK-ow! always has something smart to say, and it's a shame if it's ignored.

 

[Raziek]

You realize that every game has that problem and you taking him out of the game solves nothing, right?

also, it was m2k that got him to where he is currently. When ken played him, he used a lot smooth aggression, overall precise play and straight up smarter playing to get his wins. M2K proved how good marth is by displaying simple mathematical option traps such as the jab and counter edge guard.

no, im saying you have one of the smartest smashers in the history of the gaming SERIES doing everything he can to find a high class winning methodology to his character. Yeah he will be good, and once other players of the same character catch on it will seem like its the character's fault not the people who are doing the work with him.

Taking him out of the game DOES solve something, because the other characters that would fill the void (likely Snake and Diddy), have weaknesses, and the fact that more characters would be viable means more metagames develop, resulting in a healthier game. How much healthier, is the subject of debate.

Also, your "M2K makes this character god" theory doesn't cut it either. ADHD and Ally play on the same level, and they both contribute to their characters development. (ADHD extensively, Ally not quite as much)

As has been asked before, where then, are the legion of Diddy's and Snakes that should be rallying behind their leaders, Ally and ADHD, like the MK's do around M2K? DOESN'T HAPPEN. Why? Because Ally and ADHD are outliers, and Metaknight is dominant enough that people don't put in the effort to advance a weaker, though viable character.

 

[Kewkky]

I wasn't ignoring PK-Ow!'s post, I just don't know what to answer to it. It was a legitimate statement, but not a question, so, yeah. :|

 

[stingers]

i agree with everything OS has ever said, ever

ban metaknight, rob will be top oolmonke

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

edit: this was to Raziek's post quoting mine a few posts up. This thread moves fast >_<

^exactly what i've been saying all along. Ally, ADHD, ect are on the same/similar level as m2k and are thus able to beat him. MK is less dominant at the very top level than he is at the levels directly below (currently), seeing as he hasn't been getting 1st at the biggest tournaments around (neither genesis nor pound 4).

Just because all the lower level diddys and snakes haven't caught on yet doesn't mean there is no possible way for them to.

Basically, back to what i said before, leave the metagame alone. If you're only banning the character because he is dominant without proof he is actually broken you are halting the metagame before you see the outcome.

To prove he is broken would mean you would have a strategy with no method of defeat if done correctly. Afaik all of those methods are banned (ICG, planking).

 

[SmashChu]

Get Better has been disproven, not by proving he's broken, but by proving there's no need to get better, because you can just play meta-Knight. Doesn't hold water.

facepalm.jpg

That point only works if Meta-Knight is broken. Then, there would be no point to picking another character because Meta-Knight would dominate every other character. Since Meta-Knight isn't broken, your point does not work because you can pick other top tier characters and do well, especially if they work better into your own playing style. Other characters have advantages where Meta-Knight has a 5:5 (it's 55:45, but it's way to close to 5:% to make a call). And you may just be better with another character who is still very viable. So there is still a choice to playing other characters.

Most fighting games have one or more dominate character. In Smash, it seems people intentionally pick the best character rather then picking ones that they want to play or are more comfortable. In Street Fighter 4, despite the fact that Sagat is the strongest character and is much better comparatively then Meta-Knight, people tend to play more characters including Ryu, Balrog, Blanka, Zangeif, M. Bison, Rufus and Akuma. There are even many players for low tier characters (at last Evo, El Fuete was the only character not represented). Heck, most people pick Ryu. His dominance is not a testimate to his strength but how people play Smash. Diddy, Snake, Falco, Wario, Kirby and King Dedede (among others I'm sure) are all viable characters. Just people tend to focus on learning Meta-Knight. This is just how the Smash Bros. community is.

The problem I see is that people tend to see Meta-Knight winning a lot and consider him overpowered and even claim he is better then characters in other games when he is really not. Again, fighting games will have one character who goes above and beyond for what ever reason and people tend play and move on. Smash is still young, so you all have yet reached a point to where you will play more characters and try to advance their own metagame because you like them or how they play rather then picking from the top exclusively.

 

[Eddie G]

leave the metagame alone.

To prove he is broken would mean you would have a strategy with no method of defeat if done correctly. Afaik all of those methods are banned (ICG, planking).

So...you tell us to leave the metagame alone yet acknowledge tactics being banned within your own argument. That doesn't make any sense. Any change made (including the ban/limit of character tactics) affects the metagame.

 

[Kewkky]

Basically, back to what i said before, leave the metagame alone. If you're only banning the character because he is dominant without proof he is actually broken you are halting the metagame before you see the outcome.

So, you're telling me that we should let Brawl die first, THEN think about banning MK?

The problem I see is that people tend to see Meta-Knight winning a lot and consider him overpowered and even claim he is better then characters in other games when he is really not. Again, fighting games will have one character who goes above and beyond for what ever reason and people tend play and move on. Smash is still young, so you all have yet reached a point to where you will play more characters and try to advance their own metagame because you like them or how they play rather then picking from the top exclusively.

The amount of dominance on other characters he exherts on a game like Brawl (hit-and-run, no real one-third-of-your-life-is-now-down combos nor a single life bar per match) IS too much. Top characters in other games can see their characters and compare them to other fighting games because their general playstyles are exactly the same: bait and punish with damaging combos until the lifebar disappears. In Melee the strategy is pretty much the same, except replace "life bars" with "4 stocks". In Brawl is "poke in hits until the opponent is ready to die, then repeat 2 more times" for the match to be over. What, no heavy-damage-inducing combos like Melee? No hitstun dependence like in other fighting games? Airdodges/A-attacks used as re-usable combo breakers in Brawl since they practically cancel hitstun? Sounds to me like you're telling martians to man up and deal with the abundance of oxygen.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

except your community has already banned the tactics which means in the current ruleset there is nothing broken about MK

 

[kackamee]

What negatives really come out from MK being banned?

Besides people SUPPOSEDLY leaving. Which we won't know for a fact until we actually try banning him.

 

[Eddie G]

except your community has already banned the tactics which means in the current ruleset there is nothing broken about MK

But it still was a form of manipulation to the metagame, so why even try to bring the "leave the metagame alone" point up as a principle to abide by now?

 

[Kewkky]

except your community has already banned the tactics which means in the current ruleset there is nothing broken about MK

And after MK is banned, in the current-to-be ruleset there will be no MK-specific rules, making him broken with IDC yet again.

 

[Raziek]

edit: this was to Raziek's post quoting mine a few posts up. This thread moves fast >_<

^exactly what i've been saying all along. Ally, ADHD, ect are on the same/similar level as m2k and are thus able to beat him. MK is less dominant at the very top level than he is at the levels directly below (currently), seeing as he hasn't been getting 1st at the biggest tournaments around (neither genesis nor pound 4).

Just because all the lower level diddys and snakes haven't caught on yet doesn't mean there is no possible way for them to.

Basically, back to what i said before, leave the metagame alone. If you're only banning the character because he is dominant without proof he is actually broken you are halting the metagame before you see the outcome.

To prove he is broken would mean you would have a strategy with no method of defeat if done correctly. Afaik all of those methods are banned (ICG, planking).

We've left it alone for almost two years. The same argument comes up every **** time from anti-ban, "Just wait it out, he'll stop dominating." Too bad, we've waited long enough, it isn't going to happen.

facepalm.jpg

That point only works if Meta-Knight is broken. Then, there would be no point to picking another character because Meta-Knight would dominate every other character. Since Meta-Knight isn't broken, your point does not work because you can pick other top tier characters and do well, especially if they work better into your own playing style. Other characters have advantages where Meta-Knight has a 5:5 (it's 55:45, but it's way to close to 5:% to make a call). And you may just be better with another character who is still very viable. So there is still a choice to playing other characters.

The problem I see is that people tend to see Meta-Knight winning a lot and consider him overpowered and even claim he is better then characters in other games when he is really not. Again, fighting games will have one character who goes above and beyond for what ever reason and people tend play and move on. Smash is still young, so you all have yet reached a point to where you will play more characters and try to advance their own metagame because you like them or how they play rather then picking from the top exclusively.

You don't have to be broken to be the best option. He has no disadvantaged matchups except MAYBE, Diddy, and only at the level ADHD plays. This is not applicable to the rest of the metagame, which matters just as much, due to being the majority of the MONEY. Without money, no tournaments, no top-level metagame. You cannot consider ONLY the top.

Also, same thing to you about the "more time" argument. It goes right along with the "new tactics BS", which hasn't panned out, because MetaKnight is making just as much use out of almost all the new AT's, sometimes even MORE than other characters.

 

[Zankoku]

What negatives really come out from MK being banned?

Besides people SUPPOSEDLY leaving. Which we won't know for a fact until we actually try banning him.

You're asking the wrong question here. If you want to ban/remove something, you want to see how much BETTER things get, not if nothing gets worse.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

the pro-ban side hasn't come up with any single shard of proof for ban. When asked "why should a character be banned" they can't give a straight answer except "MK is dominating the scene". All the weight in this debate is on the pro-ban side to prove why MK is ban worthy. The reason there are very little anti-ban posts is simply because the only work they are required to do is sit around until the pro-banners can find a real argument (which i doubt will ever happen).

But yea, can someone PM me once OS comes up with a legit argument? I don't really have a stake in either side, but i'm curious as to how this pans out.

You don't get the situation so hush. If anything proof was already given. The main problem is that no one can create standard ban criteria that every1 will agree on.

Get out of the January era or simply get lost.

 

[Spelt]

This whole argument is stupid. The last vote was the fourth and final vote.

All of this complaining isn't going to get him banned.

"He dominates the tournament scene."
You let him dominate it by not being better.

"I can't beat him even though he's beatable."
Get better.

8 years and a few months where as Smash 64 has been out for 11 years and a few months, excuse me.

Smash 64 moved past the competitive scene because when Melee came out everyone jizzed over the graphics, more characters, and the fact you could wavedash. There are plenty of Smash 64 tournaments I don't attend online as well as ladder matches on AIB. The only reason Pikachu isn't dominant is because the people playing those games got better and smarter...unlike this community. 4 to 5 frames isn't comparable to wifi. Brawl's buffer is 10 frames. 4-5 frames is about half of that.

you really have no idea what you're talking about.
wavedashing wasn't even useful for like the first 3-4 (?) years of melee's competitive scene.
please just go dig yourself a hole and never come out, you're just embarrassing yourself with these wild statements.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

So, you're telling me that we should let Brawl die first, THEN think about banning MK?


The amount of dominance on other characters he exherts on a game like Brawl (hit-and-run, no real one-third-of-your-life-is-now-down combos nor a single life bar per match) IS too much. Top characters in other games can see their characters and compare them to other fighting games because their general playstyles are exactly the same: bait and punish with damaging combos until the lifebar disappears. In Melee the strategy is pretty much the same, except replace "life bars" with "4 stocks". In Brawl is "poke in hits until the opponent is ready to die, then repeat 2 more times" for the match to be over. What, no heavy-damage-inducing combos like Melee? No hitstun dependence like in other fighting games? Airdodges/A-attacks used as re-usable combo breakers in Brawl since they practically cancel hitstun? Sounds to me like you're telling martians to man up and deal with the abundance of oxygen.

except its basically the same. See this post of mine in the melee fox boards http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=9539284&postcount=100
MK basically needs an equivalent number of first hits in order to get a kill, but can be safer about going about them. He is never perfectly safe and in fact dies to a smaller number of first hits than other characters due to the fact that he is a light-weight.

 

[kackamee]

You're asking the wrong question here. If you want to ban/remove something, you want to see how much BETTER things get, not if nothing gets worse.

But I already know what will get better. And everyone else does too thanks to OS. It's just, if people REALLY don't want him banned, there must be some negatives that will come out of him being banned, but I just don't see them.

 

[Kewkky]

except its basically the same. See this post of mine in the melee fox boards http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=9539284&postcount=100
MK basically needs an equivalent number of first hits in order to get a kill, but can be safer about going about them. He is never perfectly safe and in fact dies to a smaller number of first hits than other characters due to the fact that he is a light-weight.

He theoretically dies earlier than people, but so far what I've seen in top-level tourneys and matches, MK usually dies at 150%+... That's a lot for a lightweight.

MK is more defensive than Melee Fox, and is also part of a game where defense is greatly boosted. In melee, one mistake = a stock if you're unlucky. In Brawl, one mistake = 20-30% (character dependent, Falco can do ~50%) if you're unlucky. That's a big difference between MK and Melee Fox.


There's another big difference between the two: MK can get away with way more mistakes than Fox due to the difference in both's recoveries. Fox can be gimped. MK can't.

 

[Eddie G]

Stop ignoring my questions, Sveet.

 

[Zankoku]

But I already know what will get better. And everyone else does too thanks to OS. It's just, if people REALLY don't want him banned, there must be some negatives that will come out of him being banned, but I just don't see them.

There is the very obvious negative of removing an entire character from the game. The objective is to justify it with enough positive to counterbalance that. It's the same thing that applies to items, stages, etc.

You may indeed see what good might come out of banning Meta Knight, but "what's the harm?" is never a question you should ask when considering banning anything.

 

[kackamee]

There is the very obvious negative of removing an entire character from the game. The objective is to justify it with enough positive to counterbalance that. It's the same thing that applies to items, stages, etc.

You may indeed see what good might come out of banning Meta Knight, but "what's the harm?" is never a question you should ask when considering banning anything.

Yeah, I guess. But there seem to always be counter arguments for every little criteria when it comes to banning MK. In my opinion alot of times Pro Ban wins yet MK still isn't banned, or even limited.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

But it still was a form of manipulation to the metagame, so why even try to bring the "leave the metagame alone" point up as a principle to abide by now?

And after MK is banned, in the current-to-be ruleset there will be no MK-specific rules, making him broken with IDC yet again.

Well, as discussed earlier in this thread, planking isn't MK specific. Other characters have incredible planking options, and if you removed planking limits while banning MK you'll see someone like pit rising to #1 spot with the strategy of shooting 1 arrow then planking the edge til timeout.

And IDC is a glitch tactic which are perfectly bannable when deemed broken, without banning the character. Other examples of this same thing are IC's freeze glitch and peach's wall bombing/puff rising pound stalls in melee which don't allow the opponent to hit you without suiciding to do it.

 

[SmashChu]

The amount of dominance on other characters he exherts on a game like Brawl (hit-and-run, no real one-third-of-your-life-is-now-down combos nor a single life bar per match) IS too much. Top characters in other games can see their characters and compare them to other fighting games because their general playstyles are exactly the same: bait and punish with damaging combos until the lifebar disappears. In Melee the strategy is pretty much the same, except replace "life bars" with "4 stocks". In Brawl is "poke in hits until the opponent is ready to die, then repeat 2 more times" for the match to be over. What, no heavy-damage-inducing combos like Melee? No hitstun dependence like in other fighting games? Airdodges/A-attacks used as re-usable combo breakers in Brawl since they practically cancel hitstun? Sounds to me like you're telling martians to man up and deal with the abundance of oxygen.

What I'm telling people is to find ways around his stuff. Is there a thread that tries to stop Meta-Knight?

The truth is that by the numbers Sagat is a better character. Street Fighter 3 is more top heavy, and MvC2 is flat out broken. But none of them talk about banning characters. They just find ways to fight though it. It doesn't matter if the games are different because match-ups are the same. It is agreed he is not broken, he just dominates. Either he is indeed broken and you ban him, or he's not and you fight though. Those are the only two options.

You don't have to be broken to be the best option. He has no disadvantaged matchups except MAYBE, Diddy, and only at the level ADHD plays. This is not applicable to the rest of the metagame, which matters just as much, due to being the majority of the MONEY. Without money, no tournaments, no top-level metagame. You cannot consider ONLY the top.

Also, same thing to you about the "more time" argument. It goes right along with the "new tactics BS", which hasn't panned out, because MetaKnight is making just as much use out of almost all the new AT's, sometimes even MORE than other characters.

Not sure you understand competitive fighting games.....

It doesn't matter if he has no bad matchs ups. Guess who doesn't have one either? SAGAT. In fact, where Meta-Knight goes 5:5 with the top tiers, Sagat is 6:4 with the top characters:Balrog, Rufas, Blanka, Zangeif, and M. Bison. He is only 5:5 with Ryu and Akuma. Meta-Knight is only 6:4 with Dedede. Even if the numbers are wrong, he is still only at Sagat's level. Yet guess what they'd say if you went to Shoruken? "Man up!"

By the numbers, Meta-Knight is beatable. The only way you could say I'm wrong is if the numbers are wrong, and even then, he'd just be Sagat. Winning a lot is a result of the players, not the character. Ruy is not the strongest but wins a lot. Diddy and Snake need to just find tricks out of Meta-Kngith's stuff. The only way your argument has weight is if you accept he is broken.

 

[Tien2500]

What I'm telling people is to find ways around his stuff. Is there a thread that tries to stop Meta-Knight?

The truth is that by the numbers Sagat is a better character. Street Fighter 3 is more top heavy, and MvC2 is flat out broken. But none of them talk about banning characters. They just find ways to fight though it. It doesn't matter if the games are different because match-ups are the same. It is agreed he is not broken, he just dominates. Either he is indeed broken and you ban him, or he's not and you fight though. Those are the only two options.

The MVC2 community doesn't care. Almost every winning team will have 2/4 of Sentinel, Magneto, Storm, and Cable with players sometimes using characters like Iron Man or Cyclops. And they're fine with that. And if they're fine with that then good for them they can play their game how they like to. It doesn't effect us in the least.

 

[Justblaze647]

Stop ignoring my questions, Sveet.

He tends to do that when you make him look foolish.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

He theoretically dies earlier than people, but so far what I've seen in top-level tourneys and matches, MK usually dies at 150%+... That's a lot for a lightweight.

MK is more defensive than Melee Fox, and is also part of a game where defense is greatly boosted. In melee, one mistake = a stock if you're unlucky. In Brawl, one mistake = 20-30% (character dependent, Falco can do ~50%) if you're unlucky. That's a big difference between MK and Melee Fox.


There's another big difference between the two: MK can get away with way more mistakes than Fox due to the difference in both's recoveries. Fox can be gimped. MK can't.

1st paragraph: how high does snake normally live to? My friend mained snake in brawl and claims he averaged ~210% each stock.

2nd paragraph: fox is much more defensive than MK. Please, don't start these metagame comparisons when you don't understand the metagame. The primary strategy with fox involves lasering and running away indefinitely until the opponent makes a mistake and then punishing with usmash, grab->uair or drill->shine->usmash/grab->uair. He also has much better shield options than MK overall due to the fact that he can WD out of shield or shine out of shield if the opponent is too close to safely wd out.

3rd paragraph: fox actually has one of the better recoveries in melee as far as options go [among viable characters] his is only worse than jigglypuff's and possibly peach's (though peach has a high DJ and the float to cover distance, she has very limited options to actually get back onto the stage)

 

[Tien2500]

1st paragraph: how high does snake normally live to? My friend mained snake in brawl and claims he averaged ~210% each stock.

2nd paragraph: fox is much more defensive than MK. Please, don't start these metagame comparisons when you don't understand the metagame. The primary strategy with fox involves lasering and running away indefinitely until the opponent makes a mistake and then punishing with usmash, grab->uair or drill->shine->usmash/grab->uair. He also has much better shield options than MK overall due to the fact that he can WD out of shield or shine out of shield if the opponent is too close to safely wd out.

3rd paragraph: fox actually has one of the better recoveries in melee as far as options go [among viable characters] his is only worse than jigglypuff's and possibly peach's (though peach has a high DJ and the float to cover distance, she has very limited options to actually get back onto the stage)

Alot of the stuff you mentioned about Fox being better than MK is just a result of the difference in the metagame. That's like me saying "Ryu from Tatsunoku vs Capcom is better than Ryu from Street fighter 4 because he can do a five hit combo into a baroque into another combo, into his launcher, into an aircombo into his super."

 

[Kewkky]

Well, as discussed earlier in this thread, planking isn't MK specific. Other characters have incredible planking options, and if you removed planking limits while banning MK you'll see someone like pit rising to #1 spot with the strategy of shooting 1 arrow then planking the edge til timeout.

That's assuming the opponent doesn't know how to shield. And there are still characters who can hit Pit before Pit can get that damage (other campers? people with reflectors? G&W absorbing the arrows?), and characters that can get Pit out of the ledge before the timer runs out with relative ease (Peach for one, don't care about the rest since we all know that there are people who can).

And IDC is a glitch tactic which are perfectly bannable when deemed broken, without banning the character. Other examples of this same thing are IC's freeze glitch and peach's wall bombing/puff rising pound stalls in melee which don't allow the opponent to hit you without suiciding to do it.

The only difference between IDC and those stalling tactics is that the opponent will probably die while trying to get the Melee characters to stop their tactics. MK doesn't force people to kill themselves by IDCing.

But why ban something from a banned character?

What I'm telling people is to find ways around his stuff. Is there a thread that tries to stop Meta-Knight?

The truth is that by the numbers Sagat is a better character. Street Fighter 3 is more top heavy, and MvC2 is flat out broken. But none of them talk about banning characters. They just find ways to fight though it. It doesn't matter if the games are different because match-ups are the same. It is agreed he is not broken, he just dominates. Either he is indeed broken and you ban him, or he's not and you fight though. Those are the only two options.

MvC2 worked around their broken characters by doing what some anti-ban members tell us to do: pick him up and start winning. MvC2's tourney scene revolves around 4 characters, and the game is played with teams of 3 characters each. The game has a VERY large character selection, yet they still didn't ban. I'm guessing it's because a (super)majority DIDN'T want them banned since they were the most fast-paced, universally-agreed fun characters in the game... They never found a way to fight through it, they just surrendered to the brokenness and so far it's been working quite nicely for them. I always enjoy watching MvC2 matches since they're so fast-paced, banning 4(!) characters would've taken a lot from the game.

Match-ups aren't the same. What do you call a 45:55 ratio? I call it blasphemy from a non-Smash player stance. If THAT'S blasphemy, what do you call 58:42? They're both used in Brawl (look at the Mario boards for examples), and nowhere else. In Brawl, we don't have 75:25 ratios, nor 80:20, even less 8:2. Why is this, besides the MUs aren't the same per game?

Super-majority is still the first thing people should look for when attempting to make some drastic change to the metagame. If it isn't met, then we see if the element is broken or not, or if it over-centralizes. If it doesn't do neither, THEN we move onto what we're doing now: finding other reasons as to why MK should be banned. Sort of like how there's an "other" option in multiple choice questions.

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

That's assuming the opponent doesn't know how to shield. And there are still characters who can hit Pit before Pit can get that damage (other campers? people with reflectors? G&W absorbing the arrows?), and characters that can get Pit out of the ledge before the timer runs out with relative ease (Peach for one, don't care about the rest since we all know that there are people who can).

Ok, say he fights until he has a lead and then planks for the rest of the match. What i was reading before claimed that other characters besides MK have planks and that the planking limit wasn't solely because of MK. I can go back and quote the whole discussion if you really want me to (its ~pg 7 if you're on 40 post per page)

The only difference between IDC and those stalling tactics is that the opponent will probably die while trying to get the Melee characters to stop their tactics. MK doesn't force people to kill themselves by IDCing.

Yeah IDC is just another form of permanent stall that doesn't allow the opponent a chance to regain the lead.

 

[Kewkky]

1st paragraph: how high does snake normally live to? My friend mained snake in brawl and claims he averaged ~210% each stock.

Yep, pretty much around the very high %s (+180%).

2nd paragraph: fox is much more defensive than MK. Please, don't start these metagame comparisons when you don't understand the metagame. The primary strategy with fox involves lasering and running away indefinitely until the opponent makes a mistake and then punishing with usmash, grab->uair or drill->shine->usmash/grab->uair. He also has much better shield options than MK overall due to the fact that he can WD out of shield or shine out of shield if the opponent is too close to safely wd out.

Much more defensive than MK? Fox still runs the risk of being hit, while MK can take that risk away by planking/scrooging when you get too close! Fox is also combo-fodder due to his fast fallspeed, while MK is floaty so he can't be combo'd properly BUT can combo others very well due to his multiple jumps, fast rising vertical speed, fast attacks and auto-cancelling aerials in a game where cancellign aerials is impossible. You tell ME if Fox would be better than MK if Fox was to be transitioned from Melee's physics to brawl's physics exactly the way he is in Melee, or viceversa for MK to Melee.

3rd paragraph: fox actually has one of the better recoveries in melee as far as options go [among viable characters] his is only worse than jigglypuff's and possibly peach's (though peach has a high DJ and the float to cover distance, she has very limited options to actually get back onto the stage)

His upB can be intercepted, and due to his fallspeed he's usually recovering from stage-level or below. Seeing as his only recovery options are best if at stage-level or below, this makes his recoveries very risky.

 

[Kewkky]

Ok, say he fights until he has a lead and then planks for the rest of the match. What i was reading before claimed that other characters besides MK have planks and that the planking limit wasn't solely because of MK. I can go back and quote the whole discussion if you really want me to (its ~pg 7 if you're on 40 post per page)

****, page 7? o_o

*goes check*

Yeah IDC is just another form of permanent stall that doesn't allow the opponent a chance to regain the lead.

HAH! Why don't you try starting an 8-minute match and mashing up on the cstick without failing once? MK becomes vulnerable if you fail, and the camera follows MK when he is IDCing, so it's not THAT hard to follow his location! Even worse for MK if the opponent has fast projectiles, he can just sit back and wait!


EDIT: Didn't find it, and got bored of surfing for your name. :|

EDIT2: Sorry about the doublepost, forgot I had already posted...

 

[Raziek]

Not sure you understand competitive fighting games.....

It doesn't matter if he has no bad matchs ups. Guess who doesn't have one either? SAGAT. In fact, where Meta-Knight goes 5:5 with the top tiers, Sagat is 6:4 with the top characters:Balrog, Rufas, Blanka, Zangeif, and M. Bison. He is only 5:5 with Ryu and Akuma. Meta-Knight is only 6:4 with Dedede. Even if the numbers are wrong, he is still only at Sagat's level. Yet guess what they'd say if you went to Shoruken? "Man up!"

By the numbers, Meta-Knight is beatable. The only way you could say I'm wrong is if the numbers are wrong, and even then, he'd just be Sagat. Winning a lot is a result of the players, not the character. Ruy is not the strongest but wins a lot. Diddy and Snake need to just find tricks out of Meta-Kngith's stuff. The only way your argument has weight is if you accept he is broken.

You still ignored half my post. Yes, he is beatable. I do not dispute this. Yes, I agree that he is not broken. However, he is without a doubt, the best character in the game, so why should you play anyone else? he has no counters.

You don't have to be broken to be the best option. He has no disadvantaged matchups except MAYBE, Diddy, and only at the level ADHD plays. This is not applicable to the rest of the metagame, which matters just as much, due to being the majority of the MONEY. Without money, no tournaments, no top-level metagame. You cannot consider ONLY the top.

Also, same thing to you about the "more time" argument. It goes right along with the "new tactics BS", which hasn't panned out, because MetaKnight is making just as much use out of almost all the new AT's, sometimes even MORE than other characters.

You completely ignored the bolded.

 

[billybeegood]

Of course i'm reading through this thread and the same general points are being thrown back and forth. The pro ban side says that mk meets the criteria to e removed from play and the anti ban side keeps questioning the pro ban sidesban criteria. If that is the main reason that this topic isn't getting anywhere than please allow me to intervene.
First I asked myself. why does the pro ban community want MK banned anyway? several points can be placed on this but the one that stands out is the unfair advantage over brawls metagame.
After, I asked myself why the anti ban community wanted to keep meta knight. This was more difficult, the general reasons were (please do comment or correct me if i'm wrong) that brawl still has a young metagame, but I quickly disregarded that situation considering the extremely fast advancement in brawls metagame and it seeming to steady out. the other reasons were just pure "no johns" from completely biased mk parties, and the last main reason that pointed out was "he isn't unbeatable or even close to it at that"
Here is a post I found a few pages back "What successful competative games DO NOT have is a strategy that will work every time regardless of the opponent's actions. " I believe this was an anti ban comment. which was soon followed by saying that "meta knight was the tactic" But what about planking, and all the other **** MK can pull off?
So this is saying brawl isn't a true competetive game if these tactics are stil in play (MK)

This whole ban meta knight thing is exactly like an awkward silence, the sooner you break it the sooner you can get the conversation flowing and eventually have a laugh or two.

BTW: the anti ban community is planking (metaphoricaly (sp?) of course) we can't hit them when they keep going back on the edge and becoming invincible again. well guess what anti ban community. The clock is ticking and you're higher in percent
(BTW my posts Definitly don't show it but i've been in the smash scene for quite some time so no noob johns)

 

[Fortress | Sveet]

I didn't post anything on the discussion, i didn't start posting until ~pg 70. you'd probably have to actually read a few of the posts

as for IDC being hard, that doesn't really matter. A common thing that comes up in melee is that no matter how difficult something is, someone will practice and do it consistently.

As for fox and MK being in the same game: i don't think fox would work at all in brawl physics. If he retained his melee physics, then yes he would be better than MK. and if MK went into melee and got a hitstun buff, fox would still be better. MK < Melee Marth

As for fox's recovery, its actually better above the stage. If you firefox 45 degrees above the edge, you have 3 options of recovery, but really 2 is all you need. In order to cover any of fox's options in that situation you have to full commit to it which is obvious to the fox and he can change his angle to avoid it. He can do the same thing at 30degrees above the stage and 60 degrees above the stage. At the same time he has disjointed fire protecting him starting at frame 20, which prevents most characters from hitting him unless they full commit off stage in which case its obvious to the fox and he can take evasive maneuvers like shine stall. If you grab the edge, his firefox has exactly 4 frames of lag (the same as landing on the ground without doing any move) so its basically unpunishable at the end.

Compare that to marth or sheik's recovery, all you have to do is grab the edge to force them to upb onto the stage then hit them off and repeat until they don't come back.


edit:
@randomdudeaboveme: anti-ban isn't "planking". pro-ban simply hasn't come up with a way to explain how MK is broken. All of the arguments revolve around him being dominant or otherwise being the best character in the game.

 

[Chuee]

New AT's?
Brawl hasn't even seen any useful AT's in a long time that aren't character specific.

 

[Raziek]

edit:
@randomdudeaboveme: anti-ban isn't "planking". pro-ban simply hasn't come up with a way to explain how MK is broken. All of the arguments revolve around him being dominant or otherwise being the best character in the game.

We don't have to prove that he's broken. All we have to do is prove that the benefits of banning him are enough to outweigh losing a character from the game. I will repeat this.

He does not have to be proven broken to be banned.