Official Metaknight Discussion

[RDK]

You've been pointing out that Scrooging is a huge problem.

You've done the justify part all by yourself. The support and enforce is the trouble, which is stopped by scrubs themselves, not understanding that scrooging is no better than the IDC, or Rising Pound, or ANY OTHER banned stalling technique.

SCROOGING IS NOT STALLING

Morons.

 

[Raziek]

This is the nail in your coffin.

I made a point similar to this earlier.

You don't NEED these techniques to win. If you limit and change things, all you're doing is making the match more fair, but not exactly any easier of a match-up.

They're not needed. They're just done. Why? In Brawl, you play gay or lose.

They're only not needed if you outskill the other person! Are you dense? M2K got outskilled by Ally, and it looked like he was going to lose the set, so what did he do? The only option left. HE scrooged. The only people who scrooge because they want to are sadistic players. People scrooge out of necessity, not just because they can.

 

[Allied]

I still don't understand what scrooging is then someone explain so far every time i brought it up everyone keeps giving me different answers hindering my arguement lol.

i agree with RDK! he posts in red xD

 

[UltiMario]

I edited my post after you read it lol.


All they've done in this thread is imply Scrooging in a stalling fasion. Thats what they're arguing with.

Scrooging can be used for recovering, and getting out of tight squeezes such as the "Snake case"

If you guys are so worried about not being able to use scrooging when needed, then scrooging for stalling, then even 1 scrooge a minute can even do both at once! Not saying thats exactly the way to go, but it gets my point across. How many times will you be in a case where you MUST scrooge in a minute? More than 1 and something is wrong, or you SHOULD be dead.

 

[Masmasher@]

It seems like this scrooging is hard to enforce. or has some difficulty to it

 

[Kewkky]

I edited my post after you read it lol.


All they've done in this thread is imply Scrooging in a stalling fasion. Thats what they're arguing with.

Scrooging can be used for recovering, and getting out of tight squeezes such as the "Snake case"

If you guys are so worried about not being able to use scrooging when needed, then scrooging for stalling, then even 1 scrooge a minute can even do both at once! Not saying thats exactly the way to go, but it gets my point across. How many times will you be in a case where you MUST scrooge in a minute? More than 1 and something is wrong, or you SHOULD be dead.

What if the character is being careful, but gets sent offstage two times in less than a minute, and the opponent (DDD) is ready to bair him into oblivion or catch him with a shieldgrab as soon as he lands? Will you let the glider recover from under the stage, or will you tell him he HAS to eat the bair/CG because that recovery option is banned?

 

[Raziek]

I edited my post after you read it lol.


All they've done in this thread is imply Scrooging in a stalling fasion. Thats what they're arguing with.

Scrooging can be used for recovering, and getting out of tight squeezes such as the "Snake case"

If you guys are so worried about not being able to use scrooging when needed, then scrooging for stalling, then even 1 scrooge a minute can even do both at once! Not saying thats exactly the way to go, but it gets my point across. How many times will you be in a case where you MUST scrooge in a minute? More than 1 and something is wrong, or you SHOULD be dead.

I'm done discussing scrooging with you, you clearly don't understand why we can't limit it effectively without a global ban.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Why is banning a character a last resort?

IMO, microbanning aspects of said character should be a last resort, but fortunately we'd never get there because we can just ban the character first.

 

[UltiMario]

They're only not needed if you outskill the other person! Are you dense? M2K got outskilled by Ally, and it looked like he was going to lose the set, so what did he do? The only option left. HE scrooged. The only people who scrooge because they want to are sadistic players. People scrooge out of necessity, not just because they can.

You've just admitted theres no reason to ban Meta Knight, ever. The true problem is scrooging, which needs to be SEVERLY limited or banned. Whether you meant to say that or not, thats exactly what you said.

GG, CP?


EDIT:

What if the character is being careful, but gets sent offstage two times in less than a minute, and the opponent (DDD) is ready to bair him into oblivion or catch him with a shieldgrab as soon as he lands? Will you let the glider recover from under the stage, or will you tell him he HAS to eat the bair/CG because that recovery option is banned?

MK has the advantage against DDD anyways.

Theres no problem in this peticular situation because the MK is still going to win.

Give me a situation where MK doesn't completely **** the opposing character in the Match-up and I might give you an actual detailed response.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Anti-ban: "As long as people can outskill people MK isn't bannable."

 

[Allied]

This thread is ridiculous lol

i co-sign RDK's posts though

wheres overswarm! xD i like when overswarm posts

@supermodel

Anti-ban: "As long as people can outskill people MK isn't bannable."

This is 100% true too LOL xD and i agree with it i destroy MKs

 

[UltiMario]

Pro-ban: "Theres no problems with MK, just two stalling techs MK can do, therefore, he requires a ban, rather than banning the stalling"

 

[Kewkky]

You've just admitted theres no reason to ban Meta Knight, ever. The true problem is scrooging, which needs to be SEVERLY limited or banned. Whether you meant to say that or not, thats exactly what you said.

GG, CP?

No, UltiMario, scrooging is only part of the problem. MK brings a lot of problems to a match, and we've discussed each of them whenever they've been brought up. Scrooging is only one of the pseudo-stalling strategies he can employ to get around anti-planking rules, and planking is a strategy MKs use to time people out and retain an advantage (othercharacters, like Pit, can plank but not at the level of MK, nor can they regain a lost advantage as easily as MK can, plus they have disadvantaged MUs which make it FAR harder to gain an advantage, unlike MK who has no disadvantaged MUs).

 

[Raziek]

You've just admitted theres no reason to ban Meta Knight, ever. The true problem is scrooging, which needs to be SEVERLY limited or banned. Whether you meant to say that or not, thats exactly what you said.

GG, CP?

Christ's sakes. You CANNOT severely LIMIT IT. TOO SUBJECTIVE. YOU CANNOT BAN IT. TOO SUBJECTIVE. PLEASE, GTFO.

 

[iRJi]

Ok... the scrooging and planking talk needs to stop. It is clear enough that MK can do this without little punishement. If it is not clear, then allow me to clarify it.

There are characters who can plank. Marth, GW, Pit, MK being the main and most likely the best ones who can do this. Now to add scrooging, Pit and MK would be the best 2 who can do this. To stop planking, you run to the ledge, PS the hit off the ledge while the drop down, and grab the ledge. Essancilly, just grabbing the ledge is what ends planking. The end.

Now you have Pit and metaknight, who has the ability to fly, and have more then 2 jumps overall. This is where scrooging comes in. Pit and MK can both go under the stage while in danger of getting edge hogged. The bottom line at this point, is who can plank better between the 2 listed. Pit, although has a good Uair for Planking pruposes, is limited to planking even 1/2 as decent as MK because of pit's aerial time on his moves, and a lack of recovery options once the player is actually hit out of the planking senario.

MK however, is not. He can Always recover. Also his ledge grab time to Uair combination takes far less time then any other character to preform, in any move scenario. Because of this, he becomes the best planker, and scrooger.

_______________________________________________________________

That is the 1/2 ***** version of it. In simple terms.

If Marth Planks you he risks getting hogged off the edge, and either dies, or is forced on stage for punishment.

If GW planks you he has to revert back onto stage if he is hogged.

If Pit planks you and misses, he can eat an attack that can force him into his UpB if he can not go into his glide animation in time, and that can lead to a gimp. Less flawed then the first 2, but is flawed.

Metaknight: Even if you grab the ledge, he can glide under like pit. Even if you hit him further out, he can recover back to the stage, or force you off the ledge and re-grab it. His jumps also enables him to air plank, which enables him to avoid the ledge grab rules far better then any other character in the game.

Overall: Stop talking about it. It's done.

Thank you =].

 

[Kewkky]

MK has the advantage against DDD anyways.

Theres no problem in this peticular situation because the MK is still going to win.

Give me a situation where MK doesn't completely **** the opposing character in the Match-up and I might give you an actual detailed response.

I was talking about Pit or Charizard.

MK's other problem is he has no CP, he's out of the standard CPing theme that works so well against every other character in the game, except MK himself. Snake can be CP'd, Diddy can be CP'd, they both have bad stages and/or disadvantaged MUs. MK has neither, and the truly even MU he has is himself. If the game wasn't about CP'ing like other normal fighting games, we wouldn't talk about it since stages are just flat in 2D fighters, but Brawl has dynamic stages which can aid some and hinder others... And MK is unaffected by this because all stages benefit him (just some more than others).

Oh, and there are other reasons too, all stated in OS's big posts. Did you skim all of them? I sure didn't. Food for thought, knowledge for knowledge's sake, and all that whatnot.

 

[Raziek]

This thread is ridiculous lol

i co-sign RDK's posts though

wheres overswarm! xD i like when overswarm posts

@supermodel

Anti-ban: "As long as people can outskill people MK isn't bannable."

This is 100% true too LOL xD and i agree with it i destroy MKs

1) SFP was being patronizing to the mentality of anti-ban.

2) Anecdotal evidence is still anecdotal.

 

[iRJi]

Pro-ban: "Theres no problems with MK, just two stalling techs MK can do, therefore, he requires a ban, rather than banning the stalling"

Not the argument either...

 

[RDK]

Christ's sakes. You CANNOT severely LIMIT IT. TOO SUBJECTIVE. YOU CANNOT BAN IT. TOO SUBJECTIVE. PLEASE, GTFO.

You seriously don't know what you're talking about. Stop posting.

 

[UltiMario]

Christ's sakes. You CANNOT severely LIMIT IT. TOO SUBJECTIVE. YOU CANNOT BAN IT. TOO SUBJECTIVE. PLEASE, GTFO.

Tell me why I can't say virtually the same about banning a character?

Saying that in YOUR OPINION it is too subjective to ban Scrooging is no different than MY OPINION that you shouldn't ban Meta Knight, as well as the fact that MK ISN'T BROKEN NOR OVERCENTRALIZING (at least not yet), ESPECIALLY WITHOUT THESE TACTICS.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Yeah.

Now, heres where the fun part comes in.

That would be 1 person winning a big tourney pretty much, not playing Ganon. Everyone else would be Ganon and shoot his ranking into like the 9000s.

Pound 4, ADHD.

OH jesus ****ing christ this idiocy again.

Akuma did not win EVERY single tournament.
Old Sagat did not win EVERY single tournament.

People are human, they are GOING to make mistakes, they are GOING to have patterns to their gameplay, they WILL have weaknesses to exploit

Saying that because one player outplayed another thus justifies the character is a logical FALLACY.

Player's can be an indication but they are NOT direct proof.
So seriously, both pro-ban and anti-ban NEEDS to stop citing the fact that ADHD won.

Simply because it just might be possible, that he was skilled enough to overcome the MU.
Key art of the sentence: He was skilled enough.

His opponent could have simply not been as skilled, its not something you can measure very easily, hell even minute differences can make a difference.

Oh and for one, I am anti-ban, so every single time i see stupid things such as "well ADHD won pound 4 thats proof"
NO IT ISN'T!

Inidication=direct evidence. Seriously, just, stop.

Its the equivalent in my mind. The MKs aren't WINNING, and there are other characters also in the top slots.

The question isn't, what characters appear in the top slots, the question would more be, how often?
Banning is the limit of HOW MUCH a character can dominate before they are banned.
Again, Akuma didn't win every tournament, simply because the users were human and they would make stupid mistakes.

Same rule applies, they're not a dominant force when they're just hogging tons of the top slots, but not the top slot itself.

Um no.
Simply saying "winning is all that matters!" is a bad argument.
If you have 9 MK's in the top 10 and then you have the lone Ganondorf who won the entire tournament.
That should raise some eyebrows.
Since if those other spots were choked by MK, why didn't they also take top slot?
It can very well be an indication of the winner being thatmuch more ksilled.
It can also be an indication that the characte rin the winner slot, may be a possible disadvantaged matchup for MK, possibly neutral or was just plain better.

We should analyze the reason for the results, rather than just slap the graph and saying "LOOK AT MY NUMBERS!"

 

[Kewkky]

Tell me why I can't say virtually the same about banning a character?

Saying that in YOUR OPINION it is too subjective to ban Scrooging is no different than MY OPINION that you shouldn't ban Meta Knight, as well as the fact that MK ISN'T BROKEN NOR OVERCENTRALIZING (at least not yet), ESPECIALLY WITHOUT THESE TACTICS.

Well, the difference between all of us talking about banning MK and you talking about banning the tactic? Well, there's a large majority of us, and only one of you. There are top players who also want MK gone, who used to beat on their top player on a regular basis but now fail no matter how much they try, and only you in your "ban scrooging" side. We've talked about a LOT of stuff regarding banning MK, and you are just replying to us as to why you can't ban stalling without thinking of the possible outcomes on a global basis.

 

[Raziek]

You seriously don't know what you're talking about. Stop posting.

Tell me why I can't say virtually the same about banning a character?

Saying that in YOUR OPINION it is too subjective to ban Scrooging is no different than MY OPINION that you shouldn't ban Meta Knight, as well as the fact that MK ISN'T BROKEN NOR OVERCENTRALIZING (at least not yet), ESPECIALLY WITHOUT THESE TACTICS.

Would either of you care to explain then, how you can ban Scrooging?
And Ulti, the reason you can't say the same thing is because Scrooging is limited to effects within the game. Scrooging is not over-centralizing the metagame, and characters are not tournament inviable because of scrooging. It helps, but ultimately the main cause is the character, not the tactic.

 

[RDK]

OH jesus ****ing christ this idiocy again.

Akuma did not win EVERY single tournament.
Old Sagat did not win EVERY single tournament.

People are human, they are GOING to make mistakes, they are GOING to have patterns to their gameplay, they WILL have weaknesses to exploit

Saying that because one player outplayed another thus justifies the character is a logical FALLACY.

Player's can be an indication but they are NOT direct proof.
So seriously, both pro-ban and anti-ban NEEDS to stop citing the fact that ADHD won.

Simply because it just might be possible, that he was skilled enough to overcome the MU.
Key art of the sentence: He was skilled enough.

His opponent could have simply not been as skilled, its not something you can measure very easily, hell even minute differences can make a difference.

Oh and for one, I am anti-ban, so every single time i see stupid things such as "well ADHD won pound 4 thats proof"
NO IT ISN'T!

Inidication=direct evidence. Seriously, just, stop.

If this is true then tournament results mean absolutely nothing.

Are you prepared to accept that statement?

Is pro-ban?

There's way too much hypocrisy and double-think going on in this thread. The level of ignorance is astounding.

Would either of you care to explain then, how you can ban Scrooging?.

Whether or not scrooging / planking falls under extensive stalling is up to the individual TO's at each tournmanet.

 

[Raziek]

Whether or not scrooging / planking falls under extensive stalling is up to the individual TO's at each tournmanet.

So how do they determine it? What qualifies as scrooging? You can't come to a concensus on this, because it's too hard to determine what is and isn't scrooging.

It's the same type of deal that happened with the IDC vs. EDC thing. You couldn't allow EDC because it's too close to IDC, which is banned. Who makes the judgement? If you leave it up to the individual TO's, you're stuck with yet another divisory issue as a result of MetaKnight.

 

[UltiMario]

Would either of you care to explain then, how you can ban Scrooging?
And Ulti, the reason you can't say the same thing is because Scrooging is limited to effects within the game. Scrooging is not over-centralizing the metagame, and characters are not tournament inviable because of scrooging. It helps, but ultimately the main cause is the character, not the tactic.

Meta Knight isn't overcentralizing the metagame, especially not now, and he won't be for a while.

If you can't accept the fact that MK isn't overcentralizing yet, then you have no place in this discussion. The SMART Pro-banners know that MK isn't overcentalizing yet, so you're clearly not one of them.

You've said that MKs win because of scrooging. If we took away those wins, things would look VERY DIFFERENT don't you say?


All I'm doing is restating exactly what you and other pro-banners have said.


MK's scrooging would have been just as much of a problem if he was a bad character if he kept even just his recovery. Then what would the problem be, the character, or the tactic?

The answer is the tactic

 

[adumbrodeus]

Why is banning a character a last resort?

IMO, microbanning aspects of said character should be a last resort, but fortunately we'd never get there because we can just ban the character first.

There are two levels of this.


We have the natural moveset of the character, these are things that are just blatantly unenforcable and removing them is akin to neutering the character, as well as the ease of an input error.



Then we have character ATs, glitches, and the like. These we can ban before the character, even if they are surgical because they aren't anywhere near as invasive as the former.



The thing is, if it's a technique that's, for example, are immediately ban-worthy (infinite stalls overcentralize by nature for example), if we cannot ban them in a discrete enforcable manner, then the character must go. If that doesn't work, then the game is worthless.



So, yes, scrooging qualifies as a banworthy tactic (assuming Dangr's list was correct), and should be removed through banning of passing under the stage or some similar rule.

 

[RDK]

So how do they determine it? What qualifies as scrooging? You can't come to a concensus on this, because it's too hard to determine what is and isn't scrooging.

It's the same type of deal that happened with the IDC vs. EDC thing. You couldn't allow EDC because it's too close to IDC, which is banned. Who makes the judgement? If you leave it up to the individual TO's, you're stuck with yet another divisory issue as a result of MetaKnight.

What part of "It's up to the TO's" do you not understand?

The SBR has no official statement on scrooging.

 

[Chuee]

If you can't effectively ban scrooging then tell me why Japan has a ban on it.

 

[Raziek]

Meta Knight isn't overcentralizing the metagame, especially not now, and he won't be for a while.

If you can't accept the fact that MK isn't overcentralizing yet, then you have no place in this discussion. The SMART Pro-banners know that MK isn't overcentalizing yet, so you're clearly not one of them.

You've said that MKs win because of scrooging. If we took away those wins, things would look VERY DIFFERENT don't you say?


All I'm doing is restating exactly what you and other pro-banners have said.


MK's scrooging would have been just as much of a problem if he was a bad character if he kept even just his recovery. Then what would the problem be, the character, or the tactic?

The answer is the tactic

I did not say that MK's win because of scrooging. Don't put words in my mouth. It is just another tactic in their arsenal of gay ways to play. Results would hardly change if scrooging was banned.

And you're once again bringing in the subject of over-centralization. Under anti-bans's criteria, he isn't. Under many pro-ban's, he is. Imagine that.

Scrooging would not be just as much of a problem if he kept just his recovery, because it's his recovery, in combination with his near invincibility while planking (as a result of his moveset), that creates the problem.

 

[Raziek]

What part of "It's up to the TO's" do you not understand?

The SBR has no official statement on scrooging.

Like I said, if you leave it to the TO's, you find yourself in a similar situation as leaving whether or not MK is banned, to the TO's. It's an issue that has to be all or nothing, because you can't go half and half on it. If some TO's ban it, and some don't, we're left with another divisory issue, hurting the health of the community.

If you can't effectively ban scrooging then tell me why Japan has a ban on it.

I wasn't aware they did. If you could link me to their policy on such things, I would like to read it. I have a feeling that it is in the same root as "the leaving it up to the TO's" problem, but if it isn't, I'm interested to read it.

 

[ShadowLink84]

If this is true then tournament results mean absolutely nothing.

Are you prepared to accept that statement?

Is pro-ban?

There's way too much hypocrisy and double-think going on in this thread. The level of ignorance is astounding.

The main issue with the analysis concerning the tounament results is exactly as Adumbrodeus said, and the method by which we interpret tournament results is stupid.

OH look, MK didn't win, we shouldn't ban him even though he is sucking up 9 spots.
Is it really that? What else are the underlying reasons?
At that point, rather than saying "WOMG CANT BAN HIM NOW".
We should instead be taking an indepth look at what occurred.
What character was used, what stage, who was playing, the knowledge of those playing. etc etc.

It isn't that tournament results don't mean anything, its that they should not be used as stand alone evidence.
Basically, people need to stop taking the tournaments and using them as direct evidence.

Sure, they can be used and should be used, but shouldn't be considered the absolute evidence required.

 

[Omni]

so i've done some more research. that data makes sense. i'm officially pro-ban

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

@Ultimario

The tactic is central to the character. They do go hand-in-hand. The only effective way to eliminate these tactics is to ban MK.

If you don't believe these tactics need to be addressed then MK is cool.

 

[Raziek]

Wait, really? Is Omni seriously pro-ban now? I will **** bricks if you are.

 

[Turbo Ether]

so i've done some more research. that data makes sense. i'm officially pro-ban

Which means Inui officially co-signs this statement. Uh oh.

 

[Kewkky]

You've said that MKs win because of scrooging. If we took away those wins, things would look VERY DIFFERENT don't you say?

Not at all, scrooging was coined back when LGLs were placed into tourney play. Without LGLs, planking was the most hated tactic around by everyone, accompanied by dair camping and tornado-spamming. Taking scrooging away would just keep MK like he was before, when the SBR-B's Reccommended Ruleset was standard for all tourneys: a character who ran the timer if the opponents were too difficult.

Wait, he's this way right now, as he has been before LGLs existed! My God, that must mean scrooging isn't what we hate about MK.

MK's scrooging would have been just as much of a problem if he was a bad character if he kept even just his recovery.

No, it wouldn't. MK's planking/scrooging is so frowned upon because, apart from him being able to run the timer for an easier win against people of obviously higher skill, he has the defensive and offensive capabilities to trascend beyond other characters' planking and scrooging tactics. If they lose an advantage, they have to work hard in order to regain it. If Mk loses the advantage, his offensive and defensive capabilities make it so that he's the one making the opponent work hard at keeping the advantage, so it's back to square one once he regains the advantage... Which is inevitable unless you don't make any mistakes... Which is something no human is capable of doing.

 

[zhao_guang]

so i've done some more research. that data makes sense. i'm officially pro-ban

Omni...

c'mon son

 

[Chuee]

Japan's rule is you can't fly under the stage more than twice with mk or pit.

 

[UltiMario]

@Ultimario

The tactic is central to the character. They do go hand-in-hand. The only effective way to eliminate these tactics is to ban MK.

If you don't believe these tactics need to be addressed then MK is cool.

This logic makes no sense.

By this logic I could go "ADHD won pound 4 so you can beat MKs and **** even behind all their gay tactics, so MK is fine just do nothing and go on", and you'd agree?

You boggle my mind.

Japan's rule is you can't fly under the stage more than twice with mk or pit.

I'm not sure if the Japanese have a better or worse grasp on Smash than us a this point....