Official Metaknight Discussion

[ElDominio]

So the current pro-ban platform is that MK is indeed beatable, but he's lowering attendance and killing the community with his dominance...

Is that right?

That, and that he has the unbeatable tactic of planking.

EDIT:
Thanks Budget

EDIT2:

So anti-bans told you pro-bans to get better.

I'm seeing less MKs winning and stuff.

So you must've gotten better. Grats on taking the advice.

Seriously, you might be the best argument-er ever. Grats on your achievment.

BTW, thanks for being lazy and jsut posting without catching up on the current topic.

 

[fkacyan]

Spoiler

BTW I'm not even going to read through the pages but has anyone mentioned how poorly and stupidly Hobo set up its "MK rules" I mean that was rediculous, some of the worst crap I've ever seen. Its not that anti-stalling rules are bad, its just that Hobo did them disgracefully terrible, ESPECIALLY the "MK can only CP Neutrals" part. Wow they really suck.

I actually think what Xyro is doing is better than either extreme, because experimenting with limiters in play is probably the best way to get an idea of exactly how to limit him if we're going to keep him legal. Actual play is usually better than theory.

 

[Espy Rose]

The only problem with what Xyro is doing, Thio, is that there's not really ever enough Meta Knights IN the tournament, because Texas only ever really has like, two or three.

And only one of them is a pure Meta Knight main anyway.

Can't really do much about gathering data if you don't have the Meta Knights you need in attendance (DPhat plays MK and didn't attend HOBO, and Dojo didn't attend as well).

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Just curious... what is the anti-ban platform, other than "we are the status quo hurr durr"?

 

[UltiMario]

-MK is utterly broken (ivan ooze level broken) without subjective and limiting character-specific rules in place to limit his use of a basic element of the game.

Wrong. Ican Ooze is godlike. I've never played that game before, and I bet you $100 that I could beat the best non Ivan-Ooze-player of that game with no trouble at all. Trying to Compare Ivan Ooze, and even Akuma to Meta Knight, is possibly one of the most ******** things the pro-ban could do, because it IS possible to beat a any given Meta Knight, it is NOT possible to beat Ivan Ooze. Pro-bans even admitted for who knows how long now that MK was not broken, and would never ban MK based on his broken and unbeatableness. You certainly can't ban him this way now without breaking your own words and logic. You guys set that in STONE day 1.

-MK is extremely overdominant and overcentralizing even without that tactic/with those rules

From what I see, there is no defined number or statistic for what is "overcentralizing" to date. This arguement is completely void until this happens.

-MK is killing the smash community (example: PR).

The only part of the Smash community that is dying from Meta Knight is the chunk of the community that posts in this thread.

-MK is killing character diversity.

Yes, he is, but when MK if banned, so will Marth, he gives a huge chunk of the scene trouble like MK does, will you ban him next?

 

[ElDominio]

Yes, he is, but when MK if banned, so will Marth, he gives a huge chunk of the scene trouble like MK does, will you ban him next?

I keep asking myself... How do you know this??? Because Marth gives YOU problems???? I don't really have any serious problems playing Marth with Sonic, so I guess there's a little moot point there...

And, like Budget said.... What is the anti-ban argument? Please don't ban him because I don't want to learn a new main?

 

[ShadowLink84]

Dan it I edited it so I can ignore it and you quote it anyway.
.-.

My definition is, essentially, exactly the same, just worded differently to better fit the context.

If it is exactly the same there is no need to reword it.

And you said you didn't ignore parts of my posts.[/quote
I didn't, you're dancing about it when I clearly said "You spoke stupidly."
you admitted it yourself, I can't see as to why you feel the need to further delve into WHY you said it when that, really doesn't matter.

I have only used 'if, then' statements. Once again, just in case:
If MK is banned, they are not scrubs for quitting because of MK.
If MK isn't banned, they are.

You already DID call them scrubs however in your original post.
So then are you changing what you have said and isntead making it to "they MIGHT be scrubs for quitting over MK?"

I have made absolutely no determination one way or the other because that decision has not been made yet. Moreover, it is not my decision.

*points to your original post as well as you supporting it and calling it an unpopular opinion.
Surely there is a contradiction.

As for the connotation, the way people read a word differs from person to person. I'm not going to bother appealing to emotion, because that is a fallacy (And before you say "You're using ad hominem there, buddy" I'd like to point out that as the discussion in this case is about the qualifications of said community to have input, it's not a fallacy, any more than somebody denying you a job because of your lack of qualifications).

Actually no, I wasn't going to call you on ad hominem, that in itself would be incorrect.
I am goign to ask you this, how can you determine if the community can ahve qualifications for said input?

Otherwise, the only ones that can have any input would be those with pink names, blue names and anyone else deemed "worthy" to have input.
In short, you're still relegating them as scrubs because you feel their input is not worthy.
unless of course you are saying they MIGHT not be, in which case it means your comment earlier was entirely unnecessary.

Only if the other 9000 players have the right amount of motivation and skill.

Assuming that the 1000 have the same motivation and skill.
It goes both ways.

Because listening to the population of the community is a valid argument, and determining whether or not they are worth listening to is an equally valid argument.

True, but then you need to say, how can you determine if the argument is equally valid?
Ther eis no right and wrong in the debate.

 

[fkacyan]

Just curious... what is the anti-ban platform, other than "we are the status quo hurr durr"?

That, ignoring planking, what to do about his dominance, effect on the community, and lack of character diversity is merely a matter of opinion without evidence that a metagame without him would be a very significant improvement. In other words, temp-ban to find out what's up and if it's worth it.

If planking is in the mix, anti-ban cannot possibly have a platform.

The status quo is a more powerful argument than one would think. It's how the electoral college has stuck around for so long even though, due to the advent of mass media, people really aren't nearly as ignorant as when the system was conceived.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Yes, he is, but when MK if banned, so will Marth, he gives a huge chunk of the scene trouble like MK does, will you ban him next?

We need to start physically smacking people who say this; if anything, OS/Crow/DMG's research shows that no one to date is as high a risk for overcentralization as MK is, even Snake and Diddy. People need to learn2read moar.

 

[etecoon]

the best marth lost to atomsk's ganondorf, oh man marth is WAY too good, gonna **** dis game when MK gets banned

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Wrong. Ican Ooze is godlike. I've never played that game before, and I bet you $100 that I could beat the best non Ivan-Ooze-player of that game with no trouble at all. Trying to Compare Ivan Ooze, and even Akuma to Meta Knight, is possibly one of the most ******** things the pro-ban could do, because it IS possible to beat a any given Meta Knight, it is NOT possible to beat Ivan Ooze. Pro-bans even admitted for who knows how long now that MK was not broken, and would never ban MK based on his broken and unbeatableness. You certainly can't ban him this way now without breaking your own words and logic. You guys set that in STONE day 1.

Planking. Planking planking planking planking. We thought he wasn't broken. Now we CAN go to that argument because he has an unpunishable strategy.
If the comparison to ivan ooze is wrong (it is), go with Akuma from SF2T. MK is more broken than Akuma. STREET FIGHTER banned Akuma.

From what I see, there is no defined number or statistic for what is "overcentralizing" to date. This arguement is completely void until this happens.

Hmm... who has to make this number? Is it pro-ban? If not, then this argument is permanently completely void. We asked you guys for a definition of your own and we still haven't gotten it. I'm sick of hearing that "we can't argue that MK is overcentralizing/too good until we define it". I believe that we have tried again and again to define it only to fall to an obvious brick wall-ANY DEFINING POINT THAT SAYS "BAN CHARACTER HERE" IS AGAINST ANTI-BAN'S INTEREST!

The only part of the Smash community that is dying from Meta Knight is the chunk of the community that posts in this thread.

Puerto Rico. You think all of them are in this thread?

Yes, he is, but when MK if banned, so will Marth, he gives a huge chunk of the scene trouble like MK does, will you ban him next?

No. Marth has:
-Nowhere near this level of domination
-Counters that go up when MK is out of the picture
-Even matchups

The argument "MK shuts down so and so much of the cast" is, on it's own, weak. Add it to everything else and it's the cherry on top.

 

[UltiMario]

We need to start physically smacking people who say this; if anything, OS/Crow/DMG's research shows that no one to date is as high a risk for overcentralization as MK is, even Snake and Diddy. People need to learn2read moar.

Nobody has even seen a scene without Meta Knight, ESPEICALLY one where you only have a few weeks to master a character for a tourney.

I predict that if a temp ban period happens, and if any MK wants to join in with a new main, eventually everyone will do the math of who to pick (Between the viability of the character, match-ups, and the ease of learning to quickly get back in they tournament scene), Marth will probably come out as an idea next pick, Marth usage will probably end up Spiking, and for that temp ban period, Marth will rise to near-MK levels.

After that, though, I'm not so sure, but it all seems highly probable to me. When you've got only six months of playing, researcg can be shoved over to simple convenience, and convenient is EXACTLY what Marth would be to MK mains during that period.

 

[Tristan_win]

Hello everyone, I love frame data, I love studying frame data, I love memorizing frame data, and I love applying frame data......Well I should say loved, past tense.

I am now more or less quitting Brawl.

Of course I'm not quitting purely for one reason if I was that type of person I doubt I would have hung around for so long. No there's a good selection of reasons why I've decide to retire from my favorite game but the last nail that was slammed into the coffin was the meta knight planking frame data.

I love frame data and I like to think I understand it fairly well among with my character and after thinking it over for a while I question if my character (or any for that matter) can beat meta knight planking.

The answer is a immediate no, done correctly meta knight can't be beaten. You can argue for your ledge grab rules but that's a band-aid. With the meta knight planking frame data and MLG amazing prize money people are going to plank more AND better. Your going to have people practice planking, timing ledge grabs per minute, counting number of grabs, and so on. "If you can't beat them join them." That is the best option if you want to win and I always do but being the weird guy I am I don't like the feel of any other character but Sheik and Zss so it would be impossible to invest enough time in using meta knight to do well.

With no option left and various other reasons around to quit I decide this is the best option.

So there you have it, I indirectly quit because of meta knight.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

That, ignoring planking, what to do about his dominance, effect on the community, and lack of character diversity is merely a matter of opinion without evidence that a metagame without him would be a very significant improvement. In other words, temp-ban to find out what's up and if it's worth it.

If planking is in the mix, anti-ban cannot possibly have a platform.

The status quo is a more powerful argument than one would think. It's how the electoral college has stuck around for so long even though, due to the advent of mass media, people really aren't nearly as ignorant as when the system was conceived.

It doesn't matter if the status quo is powerful or not. It's not the basis for an argument. As soon as you use the status quo as the basis for your argument, your argument is fallacious. Completely and utterly fallacious. You say "It's the status quo that MK is unbanned; he should remain unbanned." My response: "It was the status quo that black people were slaves, women were toys for men to play with and had no rights, and that we were run by kings claiming themselves to be gods". Wanna argue like that?

Also, at this point, you're saying that it's not pro-ban against anti-ban, but pro-ban against pro-temp-ban?

...

Why are we still arguing about this?

EDIT:

Nobody has even seen a scene without Meta Knight, ESPEICALLY one where you only have a few weeks to master a character for a tourney.

I predict that if a temp ban period happens, and if any MK wants to join in with a new main, eventually everyone will do the math of who to pick (Between the viability of the character, match-ups, and the ease of learning to quickly get back in they tournament scene), Marth will probably come out as an idea next pick, Marth usage will probably end up Spiking, and for that temp ban period, Marth will rise to near-MK levels.

After that, though, I'm not so sure, but it all seems highly probable to me. When you've got only six months of playing, researcg can be shoved over to simple convenience, and convenient is EXACTLY what Marth would be to MK mains during that period.

"We need a temp ban to figure out if we should ban MK, let's not ban MK".

Also, let's not forget the following:
-Marth has counters
-One of marth's counters is DDD
-DDD gets abused by MK

Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing that Marth will jump to the top of the tier list with MK out of the picture. But I'm saying that his domination will be NOTHING like MK's.

 

[fkacyan]

Dan it I edited it so I can ignore it and you quote it anyway.
.-.

I AM FAST ON THE REFRESH. I'd rather not go into why. It's more embarassing than anything else. >_>

If it is exactly the same there is no need to reword it.

Not really true. Rewording it makes it easier to examine, and in some cases it's not even possible to examine something without rewording it. The most common example I can think of in this case is the way you use trigonometric identities to make sense of complicated functions in calculus without actually changing the equation itself.

I didn't, you're dancing about it when I clearly said "You spoke stupidly."
you admitted it yourself, I can't see as to why you feel the need to further delve into WHY you said it when that, really doesn't matter.

I said I was an idiot for talking about something that is vastly unpopular.

You already DID call them scrubs however in your original post.
So then are you changing what you have said and isntead making it to "they MIGHT be scrubs for quitting over MK?"

For reference, my original post on the issue:

I can't speak for anti-ban, but in my personal opinion I'd rather not have whiny scrubs in the community. People quitting because of a beatable character is like dropping out of school because you can't pass Freshman English.

Now, if he isn't beatable, the above is obviously moot, but without planking he should be, as evidenced by the fact that MK does not take the entirety of the top 8.

I have, since the beginning, stated that there is a possibility that quitting over MK is perfectly legit.

Actually no, I wasn't going to call you on ad hominem, that in itself would be incorrect.
I am goign to ask you this, how can you determine if the community can ahve qualifications for said input?

Otherwise, the only ones that can have any input would be those with pink names, blue names and anyone else deemed "worthy" to have input.
In short, you're still relegating them as scrubs because you feel their input is not worthy.
unless of course you are saying they MIGHT not be, in which case it means your comment earlier was entirely unnecessary.

I didn't say one could adequately determine who should have input. One can far more easily identify a subset of the people who should not, however.

Assuming that the 1000 have the same motivation and skill.
It goes both ways.

Fair enough. As said above, however, if the 9000 I exclude in said experiment admit that they would give up if the 'x' factor was in play, which we guaranteed would be, they would not be useful for the purposes of the experiment. This is what I'm trying to get at here, at least with that point.

True, but then you need to say, how can you determine if the argument is equally valid?
There is no right and wrong in the debate.

I worded that poorly. The debate, which is whether or not we should listen to the community's population, is valid. A sub-debate within that, which is what samples of the population should be listened to in order to make such a decision, is valid by definition of being contained within the first one.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Nobody has even seen a scene without Meta Knight, ESPEICALLY one where you only have a few weeks to master a character for a tourney.

I predict that if a temp ban period happens, and if any MK wants to join in with a new main, eventually everyone will do the math of who to pick (Between the viability of the character, match-ups, and the ease of learning to quickly get back in they tournament scene), Marth will probably come out as an idea next pick, Marth usage will probably end up Spiking, and for that temp ban period, Marth will rise to near-MK levels.

After that, though, I'm not so sure, but it all seems highly probable to me. When you've got only six months of playing, researcg can be shoved over to simple convenience, and convenient is EXACTLY what Marth would be to MK mains during that period.

You do realize that there is no concrete tournament data to support what you just said. You realize that this is why you should stop talking now, right? Because no one proposing slippery slope has anywhere near the amount of data supporting them as pro-ban does, and because everything you just said is total baseless theorycrafting.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

You do realize that there is no concrete tournament data to support what you just said. You realize that this is why you should stop talking now, right? Because no one proposing slippery slope has anywhere near the amount of data supporting them as pro-ban does, and because everything you just said is total baseless theorycrafting.

Thank you Jack Kieser.

 

[fkacyan]

It doesn't matter if the status quo is powerful or not. It's not the basis for an argument. As soon as you use the status quo as the basis for your argument, your argument is fallacious. Completely and utterly fallacious. You say "It's the status quo that MK is unbanned; he should remain unbanned." My response: "It was the status quo that black people were slaves, women were toys for men to play with and had no rights, and that we were run by kings claiming themselves to be gods". Wanna argue like that?

Also, at this point, you're saying that it's not pro-ban against anti-ban, but pro-ban against pro-temp-ban?

...

Why are we still arguing about this?

I didn't say that it was a basis for argument. I just said it was more powerful in decisionmaking than what one would like or expect.

No, it's still pro-ban against anti-ban. As anti-ban can't prove that the metagame is better with MK, what we can try to prove is that it isn't better without him. In other words, a temp ban.

You do realize that there is no concrete tournament data to support what you just said. You realize that this is why you should stop talking now, right? Because no one proposing slippery slope has anywhere near the amount of data supporting them as pro-ban does, and because everything you just said is total baseless theorycrafting.

@Ulti: In this case, Jack is entirely right. All anti-ban can assert is the possibility that another character might become dominant, but making statements about which character and how is baseless.

 

[UltiMario]

I'm going to ignore a good chunk of your post just to get to the juicy parts better, sorry for the inconvenience, but oh well.

If the comparison to ivan ooze is wrong (it is), go with Akuma from SF2T. MK is more broken than Akuma. STREET FIGHTER banned Akuma.

I'm somewhat unfamiliar will the stree fighter series and Akuma, but from what I've heard Akuma can win by pretty much spamming the same move over and over again, correct me if I'm wrong though.

You have to do quite a bit more than that with MK, if that is true.

Hmm... who has to make this number? Is it pro-ban? If not, then this argument is permanently completely void. We asked you guys for a definition of your own and we still haven't gotten it. I'm sick of hearing that "we can't argue that MK is overcentralizing/too good until we define it". I believe that we have tried again and again to define it only to fall to an obvious brick wall-ANY DEFINING POINT THAT SAYS "BAN CHARACTER HERE" IS AGAINST ANTI-BAN'S INTEREST!

Any Anti-ban that doesn't have a point where they can admit that MK is overcentralizing is stupid and should stop posting in this thread. NOW.

I've been trying for like TWO HUNDRED PAGES or some **** like that to try to get a discussion on this rolling, as it is the most definate and least controvertial way to ban/prevent a ban on MK, and it should be a top priority to get done. Yet nobody has listened.

Maybe if you can help me get said discussion rolling we can get this done?

Just for a random starting point, my stance is 51% dominance over all characters. My only reasoning is that I dislike seeing a single character ruling over half a metagame, no more, no less.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Okay.

Quick question.

Is ANYONE here still against a temporary (6-12 month) ban on Metaknight?

EDIT: @Ultimario: Planking. Instead of one move, you spam ledgedrop->jump->double uair. All right, I'll admit it. It's harder to win with MK than it is with Akuma. Except it isn't "Press A again and again to win". It's something like "press down->left->down->left AB over and over again to win". So not that huge of a difference. I assume you mean the red fireball lock? If you mean the Air fireball, lol. Planking > air Fireball

 

[DallasPhat]

I'm not going to lie.. banning MK right when MLG picking up brawl is kinda stupid.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I'm not going to lie.. banning MK right when MLG picking up brawl is kinda stupid.

As opposed to banning him when MLG kicks us off the circuit for being to gay?

EDIT: Before I call it a night, I find one thing funny-no matter how badly anti-ban gets their ***** handed to them, no matter if all of us with a brain support a temporary ban to test out a metagame sans MK, it's all up to the people with purple names.

A little transparency? Please?

 

[fkacyan]

I'm not going to lie.. banning MK right when MLG picking up brawl is kinda stupid.

Counterpoint: Not banning MK if he is broken right when MLG is picking up Brawl is kind of stupid.

Henced the rush and intense discussions.

@BPC: it'd be for not drawing enough profit.

 

[Code Lyon]

Okay.

Quick question.

Is ANYONE here still against a temporary (6-12 month) ban on Metaknight?

EDIT: @Ultimario: Planking. Instead of one move, you spam ledgedrop->jump->double uair. All right, I'll admit it. It's harder to win with MK than it is with Akuma. Except it isn't "Press A again and again to win". It's something like "press down->left->down->left AB over and over again to win". So not that huge of a difference. I assume you mean the red fireball lock? If you mean the Air fireball, lol. Planking > air Fireball

I have no problem with the temp. ban. Also, Mario stop with the Marth domiant theory....

 

[UltiMario]

Okay.

Quick question.

Is ANYONE here still against a temporary (6-12 month) ban on Metaknight?

Me.

If anything, lets let MLG blow over before starting this whole mess. The results from MLG will pretty much entirely decide what the Meta Knight ban result will look like, so once those results come in, we can start talking.

 

[ElDominio]

I'm not going to lie.. banning MK right when MLG picking up brawl is kinda stupid.

I'm sorry I'm going to let you finish but Beyonce had one of the best music videos of all time!!!!!!!

Just wanted to say that

POINT BEING
Great point to bring to the thread.
And no, it's not, Brawl's life depends on this decision, at least most of it.

EDIT

Me.

If anything, lets let MLG blow over before starting this whole mess. The results from MLG will pretty much entirely decide what the Meta Knight ban result will look like, so once those results come in, we can start talking.

Hey, they said this in about 60 nationals before MLG, and those being of much lesser weight.

Let's just keep delaying it for 6 more years?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Me.

If anything, lets let MLG blow over before starting this whole mess. The results from MLG will pretty much entirely decide what the Meta Knight ban result will look like, so once those results come in, we can start talking.

No they won't... why would they?

 

[fkacyan]

Me.

If anything, lets let MLG blow over before starting this whole mess. The results from MLG will pretty much entirely decide what the Meta Knight ban result will look like, so once those results come in, we can start talking.

The argument that:

After a season of MLG, it will be too late to save the community from being kicked off the circuit

is a legitimate one.

Also, if anti-ban is correct, we have everything to gain and nothing to lose from a temporary ban.

 

[UltiMario]

You pro bans are all about data and stuff like that.

So why would you risk the chance of ruining one of the largest hordes of tournament result data, that could provide ther crucial proof of MK's banworthyness due to the actions taken there?

 

[Matador]

No.

The current pro-ban platform is:
-MK is utterly broken (ivan ooze level broken) without subjective and limiting character-specific rules in place to limit his use of a basic element of the game.

I know this has been beaten to death, but I'm still not quite convinced. You can respond to this with quotes, I won't be offended:

Are you sure he's not simply the best character in the game, rather than "broken" as you suggest? After all, between the dominating, he's also being beaten by non-MK players.

-MK is extremely overdominant and overcentralizing even without that tactic/with those rules

If he's the best character in the game, which he undoubtedly is, his role actually includes being the dominant character...

In theory, the best character should always win. The fact that he's not completely dominating means that the game is somewhat healthy.

-MK is killing the smash community (example: PR).

What do you mean "killing the smash community"?

-MK is killing character diversity.

Because he's the best character? The rest of the game's top characters would have a similar effect were he banned wouldn't they?

Marth beats the majority of the cast, as does Snake and Diddy. Don't they also kill character diversity?

I'm probably missing over half of it. All of these points have either been researched in objective cases (Broken via planking data, overdominant through Crow!'s and OS's data, killing character diversity via matchup ratios) or given many examples in subjective cases (Puerto Rico).

The data still doesn't convince me of anything but the fact that MK is the best character in the game. As the best character, his responsibilities include:

Having better tourney placings than the rest of the cast.

Having better overall match-ups than the rest of the cast.

Being a better overall character than every character beneath him on the tier list.

Being the most frequently used character.

How are we so sure than his dominance is harmful rather than natural for a competitive game?

That, and that he has the unbeatable tactic of planking.

I thought it was only unbeatable by some characters like Falco?

 

[HeroMystic]

Seeing a lot of circle jerking right now.

 

[MarKO X]

I'm somewhat unfamiliar will the stree fighter series and Akuma, but from what I've heard Akuma can win by pretty much spamming the same move over and over again, correct me if I'm wrong though.

You have to do quite a bit more than that with MK, if that is true.

With ST Akuma, you can spam air fireballs and the opponent is going to have a hard *** time getting around it (if they get around it at all).

Spam it at the right angle against the right opponent, and the opponent can block or get hit or hope he has an invincible reverse. Even if you move, Akuma has more than enough options to do what he needs to do to ****.

Akuma also has a red fireball lock, that can and will lock you in blockstun in the corner if done correctly. IIRC, most invincible reverses don't even have enough invincibility frames to escape it either.

Now with MK, all you have to do is get a lead of some sort, and properly alternate between uair and downB planking. Once you get the timing of each down correctly, and once you know what situations require what type of planking... good game.

Oh yeah, and he has scrooging. lolololololol

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

The argument that:

After a season of MLG, it will be too late to save the community from being kicked off the circuit

is a legitimate one.

Also, if anti-ban is correct, we have everything to gain and nothing to lose from a temporary ban.

I'm starting to like you more.

The issue is, if pro-ban is correct, then MK is going to gay up the MLG pro circuit so ****ing hard, you'll need a crowbar to remove the **** (SSBB) from its ***. Shame they run CS (they run CS, right?) which is part of the orange box. :V

If we're right, and MK makes it to MLG, then Brawl will NEVER return to MLG. And that might be the shock that kills it for good.

 

[ElDominio]

You pro bans are all about data and stuff like that.

So why would you risk the chance of ruining one of the largest hordes of tournament result data, that could provide ther crucial proof of MK's banworthyness due to the actions taken there?

That's one of the logical fallacies. Hasty generalization, methinks....

And, because there is enough proof. The game is already 2 years old. This discussion is long overdue.

Marth beats the majority of the cast, as does Snake and Diddy. Don't they also kill character diversity?

The only point I know how to contest.

MK beats all of the cast (no bad matchups), while Marth has some weird 50:50s like DK, Rob and Wolf.

People that main Wolf would have the benefit of having a good matchup against Marth. With MK, not so much...

 

[ElDominio]

2x post.... i suck....

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

You pro bans are all about data and stuff like that.

So why would you risk the chance of ruining one of the largest hordes of tournament result data, that could provide ther crucial proof of MK's banworthyness due to the actions taken there?

Wait... are you criticizing us for USING DATA?

...

I take it back. Thio, I'm sorry. That post I criticized as super dumb? This is WORSE. WAAAAY Worse.

We're fine on ruining the chance to get more data if it saves the smash community. Because, you know, this is what MATTERS?

If we see gay MK play like we know is possible (and incredibly effective) in a bunch of MLG tournaments, you think we'll be back on the circuit next year? This is why pro-ban is saying "act now" and use this time as a way to test the metagame without MK!

I know this has been beaten to death, but I'm still not quite convinced. You can respond to this with quotes, I won't be offended:

Are you sure he's not simply the best character in the game, rather than "broken" as you suggest? After all, between the dominating, he's also being beaten by non-MK players.

Because we have rules in place to limit him. Ledge grab limits are, quite clearly, a rule that only MK really needs. You can beat planking pits and G&Ws. It has been, however, proven with frame data that in perfect play AND in normal play (where the gap only widens), MK's planking is unbeatable. The only thing you can do against it is to grab the ledge against him by PSing an uair and SDIing in shield really well. That's ALL.

If he's the best character in the game, which he undoubtedly is, his role actually includes being the dominant character...

In theory, the best character should always win. The fact that he's not completely dominating means that the game is somewhat healthy.

Overcentralizing. Over being the keyword. I'll admit, this is subjective.

What do you mean "killing the smash community"?

How many people have quit because of MK.

I thought it was only unbeatable by some characters like Falco?

Read DMG's thread. It is literally unbeatable, when done right, by EVERYONE.

EDIT: Also, Marth has counters. Take from that what you will.

 

[UltiMario]

If we're right, and MK makes it to MLG, then Brawl will NEVER return to MLG. And that might be the shock that kills it for good.

I just realized something when I read this statement.

MLG might instate LGLs and scrooging rules. According to pro-ban, MK is only OP without these rules, so if these are in place, I'm thinking Brawl would still be cool enough to keep for another season.

Unless someone figures out how to make life miserable even WITH these, soon.

 

[Matador]

The only point I know how to contest.

MK beats all of the cast (no bad matchups), while Marth has some weird 50:50s like DK, Rob and Wolf.

People that main Wolf would have the benefit of having a good matchup against Marth. With MK, not so much...

Why is that an auto-bad thing? Why does that equate to broken? A really good character has few bad match-ups, correct?

So why is it so negative that the unanimously decided and rarely contested BEST CHARACTER IN THE GAME has no bad match-ups?

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

1. MK is in his own tier

2. Why are people-scratch that- MAJORITY of the community upset toward MK?

 

[UltiMario]

The Majority you speak of, when last checked, at least, was less than 60%. That may be a majority, but we're not going to pull filibusters here. Banning a whole character is a pretty big deal, so it has to be rather unanimous.