Official Metaknight Discussion

[Tien2500]

Blasphemy.

Not really. When you play a new MK as ZSS for instance they don't know how badly your Uair can wreck them, your Down B trades with shuttle loop etc. Until they learn that you actually have the advantage.

 

[Asdioh]

^ or if it's MK dittos against a more experienced MK. Which is part of the reason this "ban MK" debate was brought up, is it not?

 

[Dr.Brawl]

I know this is kind of out of know where however it is my 2 cents on the whole MK ban issue


After considering all the facts about the whole MK ban thing, and having some knowledge about MK, MK should not be banned. MK although he "technically" is the best character in the game, he OBVIOUSLY has ways of being beat. When MK gets spiked he's pretty much dead, or if the peanut gun gimp is used correctly MK is dead there as well. To take out MK would lead to what next, Snake, ICS, Falco, Marth, Diddy, DK? It's is upsetting to say the least, personally I main marth, because soon as MK goes then it's going to be Diddy, Snake, Marth, and Dk's every where.

Great examples that MK can be beatable are shown, M2K vs Ally Apex, M2K vs ADHD Pound 4, _X_ vs ZEX, and I'm pretty sure that many other notable players have done the same. MK is gdlk and for the people with the random low tier claiming that it's *** that I can't beat MK, why they hell are you playing a low tier? It's not like Ganon is really going to have a fighting chance against MK.

Also it's not fair to players such as M2k, Tyrant, Shadow, and so on that they would have to start from scratch with a new character after they have been using the character for at least a year or two. It's like if Fox or Jigglypuff suddenly got banned from melee H Box and Mango would probably become very upset at these new rules.

As far as tournaments go I'm pretty sure there would be a drop off in the amount of tournaments along with the goers. So what would be the point M2k would not be participating in smash scene any more and I'm fairly sure that many people would drop out of it which just make our community look rather stupid. Instead, and here is my alternative to the situation if some people are so hell bent on banning MK, why not just host tournaments without MK. This would fix the situation especially at the national level, but then again MK is not unbeatable and again would make the community look foolish.

So why Ban MK it would make the community look stupid, it would lead to a drop off in Brawl tournaments, it's been proven that MK is not unbeatable (Ex. ADHD, Ally, Larry), many players would have to start all the way over, and many player may potentially leave the community. It might also lead to a domino effect of MK then Snake, then the rest of the high tiers would have the banning until only a few characters are left to choose from. Most of it as M2k said deals with his popularity as well.

 

[Nitrix]

To me, brawl is based upon matchups. People say that a matchup is much more dependent on player skill than it is on the characters involved. For the vast majority of matchups this is true, sine the skill of the player can shift the outcome much more than character choice.

But to me MK starts to change this balance a little too much in favor of simple character/stage choice. When a MK player can spam moves that require little skill like Tornado to decimate half the cast I feel like I need to put my foot down and vote to ban him.

To me, it seems like MK would also increase tournament viability.

After considering all the facts about the whole MK ban thing, and having some knowledge about MK, MK should not be banned. MK although he "technically" is the best character in the game, he OBVIOUSLY has ways of being beat. When MK gets spiked he's pretty much dead, or if the peanut gun gimp is used correctly MK is dead there as well

I really hope you are being sarcastic. There are no OBVIOUS ways to beat MK, let alone what is in this paragraph...

Also it's not fair to players such as M2k, Tyrant, Shadow, and so on that they would have to start from scratch with a new character after they have been using the character for at least a year or two. It's like if Fox or Jigglypuff suddenly got banned from melee H Box and Mango would probably become very upset at these new rules.

I don't think we should not ban MK just to please a few players. What about the countless players who would actually have a shot at a serious tourney thanks to this ban? It would please alot of people, and probably increase attendance as well as causing some interesting metagame shifts.

 

[BSP]

After considering all the facts about the whole MK ban thing, and having some knowledge about MK, MK should not be banned. MK although he "technically" is the best character in the game, he OBVIOUSLY has ways of being beat.

We all know he can be beaten. That's not why we're trying to get him banned.

 

[Asdioh]

I know this is kind of out of know where however it is my 2 cents on the whole MK ban issue


After considering all the facts about the whole MK ban thing, and having some knowledge about MK, MK should not be banned. MK although he "technically" is the best character in the game, he OBVIOUSLY has ways of being beat. When MK gets spiked he's pretty much dead, or if the peanut gun gimp is used correctly MK is dead there as well. To take out MK would lead to what next, Snake, ICS, Falco, Marth, Diddy, DK? It's is upsetting to say the least, personally I main marth, because soon as MK goes then it's going to be Diddy, Snake, Marth, and Dk's every where.

Great examples that MK can be beatable are shown, M2K vs Ally Apex, M2K vs ADHD Pound 4, _X_ vs ZEX, and I'm pretty sure that many other notable players have done the same. MK is gdlk and for the people with the random low tier claiming that it's *** that I can't beat MK, why they hell are you playing a low tier? It's not like Ganon is really going to have a fighting chance against MK.

Also it's not fair to players such as M2k, Tyrant, Shadow, and so on that they would have to start from scratch with a new character after they have been using the character for at least a year or two. It's like if Fox or Jigglypuff suddenly got banned from melee H Box and Mango would probably become very upset at these new rules.

As far as tournaments go I'm pretty sure there would be a drop off in the amount of tournaments along with the goers. So what would be the point M2k would not be participating in smash scene any more and I'm fairly sure that many people would drop out of it which just make our community look rather stupid. Instead, and here is my alternative to the situation if some people are so hell bent on banning MK, why not just host tournaments without MK. This would fix the situation especially at the national level, but then again MK is not unbeatable and again would make the community look foolish.

So why Ban MK it would make the community look stupid, it would lead to a drop off in Brawl tournaments, it's been proven that MK is not unbeatable (Ex. ADHD, Ally, Larry), many players would have to start all the way over, and many player may potentially leave the community. It might also lead to a domino effect of MK then Snake, then the rest of the high tiers would have the banning until only a few characters are left to choose from. Most of it as M2k said deals with his popularity as well.

And now I remember why I don't spend much time in these threads.

 

[Overswarm]

I know this is kind of out of know where however it is my 2 cents on the whole MK ban issue

Welcome to the party.

After considering all the facts about the whole MK ban thing

*narrows eyes*

, and having some knowledge about MK,

*raises eyebrow*

MK should not be banned.

Let's hit your reasoning one-by-one!

MK although he "technically" is the best character in the game, he OBVIOUSLY has ways of being beat.

He has a defeat screen, yes. Yes, a player making mistakes can cause MK to lose. Skill gaps can tilt the game in your favor.

But there is no "technically". He is.

When MK gets spiked he's pretty much dead,

As opposed to? If MK can't get back, there isn't anyone in the game who can.

or if the peanut gun gimp is used correctly MK is dead there as well.

What?

To take out MK would lead to what next, Snake, ICS, Falco, Marth, Diddy, DK? It's is upsetting to say the least, personally I main marth, because soon as MK goes then it's going to be Diddy, Snake, Marth, and Dk's every where.

This is conjecture.

In all likelihood, the only character listed above we'd see an increase in is Marth, at least in the long term. Diddy Kong and Snake's results have been inflated due to MK's dominance; they have the best overall matchup with MK, and with MKs taking out their opponents they've thrived. With MK gone, it's likely we'll see many other characters coming into the fray, one of them being D3.... which will mean DK will not be a huge primary. Maybe a secondary, but not a primary.

Great examples that MK can be beatable are shown, M2K vs Ally Apex, M2K vs ADHD Pound 4, _X_ vs ZEX, and I'm pretty sure that many other notable players have done the same. MK is gdlk and for the people with the random low tier claiming that it's *** that I can't beat MK, why they hell are you playing a low tier? It's not like Ganon is really going to have a fighting chance against MK.

You've listed several isolated examples; if you've reviewed the facts, you'd see that we've looked at MK's placement over the past 6 and past 13 months independent of one another. At worst, MK is about 2.5x better than Snake. From there the gap gets wider. MUCH wider.

Also it's not fair to players such as M2k, Tyrant, Shadow, and so on that they would have to start from scratch with a new character after they have been using the character for at least a year or two. It's like if Fox or Jigglypuff suddenly got banned from melee H Box and Mango would probably become very upset at these new rules.

For one, 2 years != 8 years, but I see what you're saying in principle.

But which is more fair:

Saying 'well, these guys are all playing a character that should be banned, but we don't want to hurt their feelings' and leaving MK in when we know better?

or saying "in X amount of time we are going to ban MK; pick up secondaries and practice them now!" and then banning him?

Why think about the MK mains, anyway? Everyone else has to put up with them in tournament.

As far as tournaments go I'm pretty sure there would be a drop off in the amount of tournaments along with the goers. So what would be the point M2k would not be participating in smash scene any more and I'm fairly sure that many people would drop out of it which just make our community look rather stupid. Instead, and here is my alternative to the situation if some people are so hell bent on banning MK, why not just host tournaments without MK. This would fix the situation especially at the national level, but then again MK is not unbeatable and again would make the community look foolish.

What evidence do you have for a drop off in tournaments and attendance? We've had MK banned events around the country and attendance has never been an issue.

And your "alternative" is to ban MK from events? That's not an alternative.

So why Ban MK it would make the community look stupid, it would lead to a drop off in Brawl tournaments, it's been proven that MK is not unbeatable (Ex. ADHD, Ally, Larry), many players would have to start all the way over, and many player may potentially leave the community. It might also lead to a domino effect of MK then Snake, then the rest of the high tiers would have the banning until only a few characters are left to choose from. Most of it as M2k said deals with his popularity as well.

Who cares if he's unbeatable? Simply having a defeat screen doesn't make you unbannable.

The "slippery slope" is also pretty stupid; Snake WAS #1. We found multiple counters in two months, then MK took the throne.

 

[Kaffei]

And now I remember why I don't spend much time in these threads.

Why ?
EDIT: Nvm OS answered it

 

[iRJi]

And now I remember why I don't spend much time in these threads.

Lol, yepp.

To me, brawl is based upon matchups. People say that a matchup is much more dependent on player skill than it is on the characters involved. For the vast majority of matchups this is true, sine the skill of the player can shift the outcome much more than character choice.

You know, this is true. It's been stated again and again, and no one has denied this truth.

Can everyone agree that Brawl is based off of counter-picking your opponent?

 

[Kaffei]

Lol, yepp.



You know, this is true. It's been stated again and again, and no one has denied this truth.

Can everyone agree that Brawl is based off of counter-picking your opponent?

And MK is the perfect CP?

 

[Justblaze647]

Since everyone else is doing it, I figure I'll strike while the iron's hot

To take out MK would lead to what next, Snake, ICS, Falco, Marth, Diddy, DK?

Simple question: Aren't six characters fighting over the top spots much better than one ()?

 

[Overswarm]

And MK is the perfect CP?

He's the null pick.

No matter what, you're never at a disadavntage by doing so except by disadvantages of your own creation. In short, he's the failsafe.

It would certainly be more profitable to learn, say, Dedede if you have 20 DK mains in your area, but this is generally not the case. What is more likely is a variety of matchups, and MK is your best bet.

 

[CRASHiC]

So, instead of saying "Get good like ADHD," how about we watch ADHD videos and find out exactly why he wins each match, find out what he does that other players don't do and apply it ourselves OR find out if the other players are following for stupid traps and set ups.

 

[Kaffei]

Sorry to go off topic, but what's Sheik's worst MU in Melee? I'm just curious this isn't a comparison about how Sheik should be banned or anything of the sort, lol.

 

[Palpi]

No he is not the perfect or best CP, but he is the safest because he has no bad stages and no bad match ups. You can only CP personal bad match ups against a MK. Mk is also the best pocket character to have.

You main IC and second rainbow cruise. Now where does your opponent take you?

 

[Overswarm]

So, instead of saying "Get good like ADHD," how about we watch ADHD videos and find out exactly why he wins each match, find out what he does that other players don't do and apply it ourselves OR find out if the other players are following for stupid traps and set ups.

I'm in the process of doing that with ADHD and other Diddy mains at the moment. It's basically "diddy has to mindgame the opponent" or "Diddy has a fortress for approximately 9 seconds that is unpunishable safe for a few characters".

 

[rvkevin]

So, instead of saying "Get good like ADHD," how about we watch ADHD videos and find out exactly why he wins each match, find out what he does that other players don't do and apply it ourselves OR find out if the other players are following for stupid traps and set ups.

Watching M2K play ADHD is like watching a horror film when the main character is going to open a door with an alien behind it and the audience is thinking "NO, what are you doing, run away" when M2K tries to approach ADHD with the percentage lead and a banana fresh in front of him and banana in hand.

 

[fkacyan]

Simple question: Aren't six characters fighting over the top spots much better than one ()?

This is strictly a matter of opinion.

@OS and Crow!

Both of you have argued, rather convincingly, that there is a small chance of what I'm stating is a large contributing factor, but, as I've said, there's a lot to point to it being a factor as well as against. It's not a one-sided argument.

As far as the data goes, I believe I'm correct in saying that Crow!'s current graphs are somewhat like the net dominance in a period of time, or the area under the dominance curve per month, at each point on the x-axis. What I'm interested in as far as the data is concerned is whether or not is dominance has continued to rise over the entire interval or whether or not it has plateaued and begun to go down.

I might be down for a temp ban. Maybe. It's not something I'm willing to consider prior to seeing month-by-month analysis of character dominance.

 

[iRJi]

No he is not the perfect or best CP, but he is the safest because he has no bad stages and no bad match ups.

This would make him the best CP by default then LOL

 

[Justblaze647]

This is strictly a matter of opinion.

No.

I disagree. That is an opinion.

 

[rvkevin]

This is strictly a matter of opinion.

So are you saying you would prefer one viable character over 6?

If you hold this view, you probably wouldn't ban MK even if he had 90-10 match ups with the entire cast (and the sad thing is all of anti-ban arguments still apply for such a severely unbalanced character).

 

[BSP]

This would make him the best CP by default then LOL

Mk is the best secondary, let's put it as that.

 

[Kaffei]

So are you saying you would prefer one viable character over 6?

If you hold this view, you probably wouldn't ban MK even if he had 90-10 match ups with the entire cast.

If that were the case he would already be banned.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I think Thio is just asying that whether or not there are one or six viable characters is not for us to decide. THat's a little silly though given that we shaped the game in our own image.

 

[Overswarm]

This is strictly a matter of opinion.

@OS and Crow!

Both of you have argued, rather convincingly, that there is a small chance of what I'm stating is a large contributing factor, but, as I've said, there's a lot to point to it being a factor as well as against. It's not a one-sided argument.

As far as the data goes, I believe I'm correct in saying that Crow!'s current graphs are somewhat like the net dominance in a period of time, or the area under the dominance curve per month, at each point on the x-axis. What I'm interested in as far as the data is concerned is whether or not is dominance has continued to rise over the entire interval or whether or not it has plateaued and begun to go down.

I might be down for a temp ban. Maybe. It's not something I'm willing to consider prior to seeing month-by-month analysis of character dominance.

I'd have to have crow run the numbers, but I'm not sure what you're looking for that you can't already see with the data we have.

Look at January
1 Meta Knight (179 top8, 126 top4, 72 top2, 75 wins, 452 total) - 4020.7
2 Snake (131 top8, 71 top4, 39 top2, 48 wins, 289 total) - 2024.0

Now look at February
1 Meta Knight (179 top 8, 123 top4, 73 top2, 80 wins, 455 total) - 3939.7
2 Snake (122 top8, 72 top4, 32 top2, 50 wins, 276 total) 1879.7

Less total points (less tournaments/attendance/etc. in February... up to the current date), but the gap has widened between MK and Snake. Snake is still in 2nd place.

S Rank «Uber» 43.23%
1 Meta Knight - 4020.7
2 Snake - 2024.0

A Rank «Overused» 20.67%
3 Diddy Kong - 1325.6
4 Marth - 877.9
5 Falco - 686.0

Has changed into this (so far):

MK - 3939.7 (loss of 81 points)
Snake - 1879.7 (loss of 144.3 points)
Diddy - 1146.1 (loss of 179.5 points)
Marth - 930.1 (gain of 52.2 points)
Falco - 636.8 (loss of 49.2 points)

It doesn't seem as if MK has really stopped rising, and even if he has... it doesn't really matter. The listings above obviously aren't complete since February isn't done; Snake could theoretically get top 8 in every tourney for the rest of the month or something.

I don't have enough data on hand to make a trend and am a bit occupied with some other stuff at the moment, but I think this shows that at least MK isn't suddenly spiraling downwards.

Sniddarth (Snake, Diddy, and Marth combined) have a total of 3955.9 points. That means the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th best characters combined are a grand total of 16.2 points ahead of Metaknight.

Scary stuff.

Tournament wins in Jan:

TOURNAMENT: Raising Phoenix
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=260445
DATE: January 2nd, 2010
LOCALE: Southwest
ENTRANTS: 24
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Darklink (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Level 9 Monthly
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=260443
DATE: January 2nd, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 18
ENTRY: $10.00
1 DJ Iskascribble (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: M.A.S. 2
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=260514
DATE: January 2nd, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 34
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Ally (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: New Years Brawl
LINK: http://allisbrawl.com/ttournament.aspx?id=8282
DATE: January 2nd, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 16
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Zero (Meta Knight/King Dedede)

TOURNAMENT: Paradigm Presents: WAIT, AGAIN?!
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=261043
DATE: January 9th, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic North
ENTRANTS: 29
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Mew2King (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: WATO9
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=261073
DATE: January 9th, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic South
ENTRANTS: 28
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Seibrik (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: No Waahs: The Return of the Troll
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=261075
DATE: January 9th, 2010
LOCALE: Canada
ENTRANTS: 52
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Doc (Meta Knight/Diddy Kong)

TOURNAMENT: Joker's Monthly 1/10
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=261175
DATE: January 9th, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 43
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Ally (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: The BR Act: Program 1
LINK: http://allisbrawl.com/event.aspx?id=7342
DATE: January 15th, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 18
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Tyrant (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: UCSD WGF V
LINK: http://allisbrawl.com/ttournament.aspx?id=8307
DATE: January 16th, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 109
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Tyrant (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Reloaded 5
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showpost....&postcount=260
DATE: January 16th, 2010
LOCALE: Australia
ENTRANTS: 31
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Earl (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: DNA Gaming USA #2
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262631
DATE: January 23rd, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic North
ENTRANTS: 33
ENTRY: $10.00
1 DM Brandon (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Darklink Presents "Night Shade"
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262693
DATE: January 23rd, 2010
LOCALE: Southwest
ENTRANTS: 20
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Darklink (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Fighter Frenzy
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262815
DATE: January 23rd, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 29
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Affinity (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Delta Upsilon II
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262707
DATE: January 23rd, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 30
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Mew2King (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: UC Davis Monthlies 4
LINK: http://allisbrawl.com/ttournament.aspx?id=7895
DATE: January 23rd, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 17
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Catnip (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Victory Road Pt 2
LINK: http://allisbrawl.com/event.aspx?id=7493
DATE: January 29th, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 16
ENTRY: $5.00
1 Zero (Meta Knight/King Dedede)

TOURNAMENT: Rock Paper Scissors
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=263456
DATE: January 30th, 2010
LOCALE: Canada
ENTRANTS: 25
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Honey Mustard (Snake/Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Phase 5
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=263533
DATE: January 30th, 2010
LOCALE: Southwest
ENTRANTS: 48
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Dojo (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Syracuse Smash 2
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=263507
DATE: January 30th, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic North
ENTRANTS: 34
ENTRY: $5.00
1 Shadow (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: OC#2: M2K's Monthly Donation Fund
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=263560
DATE: January 30th, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 53
ENTRY: $10.00
1 M2K (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: PMS V
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showpost....postcount=2391
DATE: January 30th, 2010
LOCALE: Australia
ENTRANTS: 23
ENTRY: $20.00
1 Amaterasu (Meta Knight/Pikachu/Toon Link)

TOURNAMENT: Bushido Nibai Impact 3
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=259909
DATE: January 31st, 2010
LOCALE: Europe
ENTRANTS: 105
ENTRY: $13.78
1 Kaos (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: MSC4: Legacy of Legends in Smash EXtended
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=264367
DATE: February 6th, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 41
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Mew2King (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: World 2-4
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=264381
DATE: February 6th, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 61
ENTRY: $10.00
1 DSF (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: 3 Stock'd II
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showpost....&postcount=407
DATE: February 7th, 2010
LOCALE: Australia
ENTRANTS: 29
ENTRY: $5.00
1 Afropony (Meta Knight/Pit)

TOURNAMENT: Welcome to the Cyty
LINK: http://s8.zetaboards.com/1UP_Smash_B...pic/8180644/1/
DATE: February 9th, 2010
LOCALE: Brazil
ENTRANTS: 41
ENTRY: $5.00
1 Player 7 (Meta Knight/Ice Climbers/Donkey Kong)

TOURNAMENT: THE EPIC OF KENNY IS COW MEAT
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=264732
DATE: February 9th, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic North
ENTRANTS: 16
ENTRY: $5.00
1 June (Meta Knight/Falco/Lucario)

TOURNAMENT: Test Your Might VIII
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=265252
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Midwest
ENTRANTS: 29
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Judge (Meta Knight/Lucario)

TOURNAMENT: Katsucon 16 Brawl Singles
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=265263
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic North
ENTRANTS: 23
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Cafe [Korn] (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Saint Valentine's BEATDOWN
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=265292
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Southwest
ENTRANTS: 25
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Sethlon (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Next Level Lan - Inaugural Brawl
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=265315
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic South
ENTRANTS: 40
ENTRY: $10.00
1 HRNUT (Snake/Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Darklink Presents "The Power Rank Decision"
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=265310
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Southwest
ENTRANTS: 20
ENTRY: $10.00
1 The Sage of Disney [Atomsk] (Meta Knight/Kirby)

TOURNAMENT: DAO's Farewell Tournament
LINK: http://allisbrawl.com/ttournament.aspx?id=8816
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 35
ENTRY: $5.00
1 Havok (Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: TCS 7
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=265343
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Atlantic South
ENTRANTS: 20
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Will_ (Donkey Kong/Meta Knight)

TOURNAMENT: Tourneyplay 4
LINK: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=265392
DATE: February 13th, 2010
LOCALE: Pacific West
ENTRANTS: 55
ENTRY: $10.00
1 Mew2King (Meta Knight)

This is strictly a matter of opinion.

To an extent, yes. Someone saying "Only having one viable character in a fighting game is okay" really can't be argued against so much, but I don't really care too much about that because anyone who says that is insane. If that was the case they'd support ivan ooze dittos all day =P

 

[Kith]

****...I knew it was bad, but seeing the numbers really drives it home.

 

[laki]

I'm curious as to how much will used mk

 

[St. Viers]

Since this got missed the first time around

Yo, OS, I have a question related to the application of your Surgical/Global changes thread, in relation to the whole ban MK debate. Sorry if the following it partially innaccurate, it's based more on reading threads/my own limited brawl experience than it is high level play experience. Also, I'm aware that the meat of my argument is nothing new, I just dislike how the anti-ban side are unable to coherently discuss/present a topic...

The way I see it, the biggest problem most people have with Metaknight isn't that he is obviously the best character in the game but rather it's the things he can do to abuse brawl's physics: namely plank and circle-camp (or scrooge I think people are calling it now?). It's because of how well he can use these (his crazy quick upB, his ability to easily go under the stage, etc). At a basic level, this seems like a simple, "well, do we limit MK by surgically removing the ability for players to abuse his edgegame, or do we simply remove the entire character?" At this level, many people would probably agree (as I do most of the time) that global changes are better. However, by looking at it this simply, people are ignoring a slightly different point of view.

In a larger sense, taking MK out of the picture is in itself a surgical change, from the viewpoint of those who believe that the problem with brawl is in fact the abusable physics rather than any one character matchup. Without Metaknight, you still have characters like Game&Watch who can plank very well. You also have Pit, who can plank and circle-camp almost as effectively (if not moreso, according to some) as Metaknight himself. In addition, Pit can do plank *offensively* because of his projectile. Looking at it in this light, the removal of every character's ability to abuse the ledge (by means of more rigorous judging of matches, or enforcing edgegrab limitations, or whatever method gains popular consensus) seems to some (myself included) to be the better choice, despite appearing a shallow, surgical change on the surface.

Even if people looking at it from both perspectives decide that banning MK is the right choice, I just want them to think about the situation in a slightly different perspective than they are used to

Last minute thought: If my original assumption (that most people don't want MK banned because he is "the best") is incorrect, all I can do is say something that is often said: Most fighting games have a character that is "the best"-- Sagat in SFIV being a recent example, but there are more if I need to go into them. That by itself is not a reason to ban a character, unless the difference is so great that he is almost unbeatable (Akuma in SF2A). However, as tournement results and theory show, this is not the case w/ Metaknight.

This being said, I think that if MK banned tourneys happened as often as MK allowed tourneys, it would be easier to gauge what would happen to the community is MK mains weren't allowed to play their character.

bump, due to being skipped over XD

 

[Overswarm]

Yo, OS, I have a question related to the application of your Surgical/Global changes thread, in relation to the whole ban MK debate. Sorry if the following it partially innaccurate, it's based more on reading threads/my own limited brawl experience than it is high level play experience. Also, I'm aware that the meat of my argument is nothing new, I just dislike how the anti-ban side are unable to coherently discuss/present a topic...

The way I see it, the biggest problem most people have with Metaknight isn't that he is obviously the best character in the game but rather it's the things he can do to abuse brawl's physics: namely plank and circle-camp (or scrooge I think people are calling it now?). It's because of how well he can use these (his crazy quick upB, his ability to easily go under the stage, etc). At a basic level, this seems like a simple, "well, do we limit MK by surgically removing the ability for players to abuse his edgegame, or do we simply remove the entire character?" At this level, many people would probably agree (as I do most of the time) that global changes are better. However, by looking at it this simply, people are ignoring a slightly different point of view.

Everyone has a different "biggest problem"; it's a myriad of factors rather than one thing in particular. His edge game is just a piece of the pie.

In a larger sense, taking MK out of the picture is in itself a surgical change, from the viewpoint of those who believe that the problem with brawl is in fact the abusable physics rather than any one character matchup. Without Metaknight, you still have characters like Game&Watch who can plank very well. You also have Pit, who can plank and circle-camp almost as effectively (if not moreso, according to some) as Metaknight himself. In addition, Pit can do plank *offensively* because of his projectile. Looking at it in this light, the removal of every character's ability to abuse the ledge (by means of more rigorous judging of matches, or enforcing edgegrab limitations, or whatever method gains popular consensus) seems to some (myself included) to be the better choice, despite appearing a shallow, surgical change on the surface.

Taking MK out is a global change; it changes no matchups in the game, just their frequency. A surgical change would be a rule about MKs ledge grabs.

Regardless, Pit and G&W planking is only conjecture. Do you really think if these two characters could plank and succeed as much as people say they do that we would not have seen ONE G&W or Pit rise in the ranks because of it? We have seen no evidence for their supposed planking abilities at all.

Last minute thought: If my original assumption (that most people don't want MK banned because he is "the best") is incorrect, all I can do is say something that is often said: Most fighting games have a character that is "the best"-- Sagat in SFIV being a recent example, but there are more if I need to go into them. That by itself is not a reason to ban a character, unless the difference is so great that he is almost unbeatable (Akuma in SF2A). However, as tournement results and theory show, this is not the case w/ Metaknight.

This being said, I think that if MK banned tourneys happened as often as MK allowed tourneys, it would be easier to gauge what would happen to the community is MK mains weren't allowed to play their character.

MK simply being "the best" isn't enough to ban him. It's the degree at which he's the best in comparison to the rest of the cast and the benefit from removing him that really does it.

 

[rvkevin]

In a larger sense, taking MK out of the picture is in itself a surgical change, from the viewpoint of those who believe that the problem with brawl is in fact the abusable physics rather than any one character matchup. Without Metaknight, you still have characters like Game&Watch who can plank very well. You also have Pit, who can plank and circle-camp almost as effectively (if not moreso, according to some) as Metaknight himself. In addition, Pit can do plank *offensively* because of his projectile. Looking at it in this light, the removal of every character's ability to abuse the ledge (by means of more rigorous judging of matches, or enforcing edgegrab limitations, or whatever method gains popular consensus) seems to some (myself included) to be the better choice, despite appearing a shallow, surgical change on the surface.

Its still a global change. Removing MK does nothing to affect the Diddy v Pit match up. However, if you make the LGL 20, then you limit Pit in the Diddy v Pit match up. You would only make this surgical change if Pit's or GnW's planking was know as a problem and since there's no Pits or GnWs placing there is no evidence to suggest that it is. Therefore, MK is really the only character that can "abuse" the edge.

 

[theunabletable]

^Why not make the ledge grab limit only apply to MK?

 

[Overswarm]

^Why not make the ledge grab limit only apply to MK?

Why not just remove MK?

 

[rvkevin]

^Why not make the ledge grab limit only apply to MK?

You could do that...but if you're going to go that route, why not limit him from gliding underneath the stage (even when recovering), using tornado, or any other sort of thing in order to nerf him. Because essentially that's what only applying the LGL to him is doing, acknowledging that he is "too good" without it and need to implement another MK specific rule to prevent him from being too unbalanced.

 

[-Kiros-]

Why not just remove MK?

That's the big thing, if you remove MK you remove all of the issues that people have with MK. It's the simplest way to "fix" the game, as some would say.

 

[WindMajor]

^Why not make the ledge grab limit only apply to MK?

Because it's unfair for Metaknight. We would have to do it to the rest of the cast.

 

[MarKO X]

^Why not make the ledge grab limit only apply to MK?

why not implement this: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262438

 

[-Kiros-]

why not implement this: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262438

Lulz it's true, if every unbalanced thing was "fixed" in Brawl then there would be no game. That's the thing about Smash: it has a diverse groups of characters that are different from one another. The creators meant for the characters to be "unbalanced" so as to prevent the game from becoming boring. If people want the game to be perfectly balanced there should make it so that there be only one character in the game.

 

[Gnes]

Because it's unfair for Metaknight. We would have to do it to the rest of the cast.

lol

10lols

 

[MarKO X]

Lulz it's true, if every unbalanced thing was "fixed" in Brawl then there would be no game. That's the thing about Smash: it has a diverse groups of characters that are different from one another. The creators meant for the characters to be "unbalanced" so as to prevent the game from becoming boring. If people want the game to be perfectly balanced there should make it so that there be only one character in the game.

Here's an interesting opinion.
Aside from Sonic and the Spacies being a tier above the rest, I think Brawl w/all items on Medium, is a pretty balanced game. I guess that'll be another thread one day: a tier list with items.......

of course, you're absolutely right though, a game with characters that are different isn't going to be completely balanced. There will always be something that beats a lot of everything else.

 

[demonictoonlink]

Because it's unfair for Metaknight. We would have to do it to the rest of the cast.

More unfair to Metaknight then just banning him?