Official Metaknight Discussion

[etecoon]

When we've PROVEN it with stats, it's not theory.

stats are cooked to say what you want them to say, when you just toss anything inconvenient to you it's not legitimate

You can deny it as much as you want but nobody has proven it wrong.
Maybe you should get on that rather than starting more ridiculous arguments that pro-ban has defeated several times already?

or I could just continue not taking you seriously, and laugh at you when MK doesn't get banned, for a fifth time.

I have NO reason to put any time into making a serious argument on this topic. I'm not even really anti ban, I'm just telling you that your battle is futile and that your arguments are erroneous

 

[Justblaze647]

math is theoretical.

hilarious quote is hilarious...

 

[Matador]

yeaaaaaaaaah look at all of the theory! With our large amount of charts and statistics.
math is theoretical.

Lol, I knew someone was going to bite eventually.

No, pro-ban facts prove that the best character in the game is doing what he's supposed to do, which is dominate...I have yet to see a valid refute for that other than, for the sake of trying to promote more balance...that MK should be banned. That way there could potentially be a top tier balance like in MvC2 or Melee...this does not concede that MK is broken or ban-worthy, but it's more a motion to promote checks and balances in the game.

That was an idea that I could get behind.

However, the actual platform that pro-ban is currently clinging to, which is "Planking is unbeatable. Surgical bans and LGLs are scrubby. Ban the entire character instead" is based on theory...because no one dominates with it in practice yet. It's somehow impossible to police if banned, so that's been put to the side before even being put into practice...

Personally...I would rather just play the game and let you bicker.

 

[MarKO X]

No one dominates with planking yet because of the LGLs?
Why does it make sense to have a broken character up to 50 grabs?

 

[Cold Fusion]

No one dominates with planking yet because of the LGLs?
Why does it make sense to have a broken character up to 50 grabs?

To artificially make him not broken.

 

[cutter]

To artificially make him not broken.

Alright, but when you realize that you should just ban a character instead of continuing to limit him?

First, we had to ban IDC.

Then we had to institute LGLs to combat planking.

Spoiler

Which really hasn't "solved" the problem.

Then scrooging pops up, and now we're starting to get a rule of "MK can't glide under the stage twice unless he gets onto the stage" or something like that.

And Xyro has also implemented yet another restriction on MK in his tournaments that MK is only allowed to counterpick neutral stages on his counterpick.

That's a grand total of four different rules specifically for dealing with MK.

 

[ElDominio]

Im all for temp ban just DO IT ALREADY!!!!

 

[UltiMario]

stats are cooked to say what you want them to say, when you just toss anything inconvenient to you it's not legitimate

I'm just going to throw this out there, but:
The statistics? Frame data. Unless we're missing something really stupid, they're not throwing out anything that could flaw their argument.

Off topic: How in the hell do you people do that color thing?

 

[Spelt]

You google pretty color transformations thingies type what you wanna say and press enter.

 

[Tien2500]

stats are cooked to say what you want them to say, when you just toss anything inconvenient to you it's not legitimate



or I could just continue not taking you seriously, and laugh at you when MK doesn't get banned, for a fifth time.

Actually when you're doing statistics you're SUPPOSED to take outliers out of your data sample. Its the way statistics work.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

You know what, I call bull****.

We have PROVEN that metaknight is broken. As in, we have proven that you can't beat him within reason if he uses the right tactic. Within reason meaning that as soon as Metaknight gets a lead and gets to a ledge with it, he wins. At this point, there's NO MORE ARGUMENT AGAINST BANNING HIM, BECAUSE HE IS A BROKEN CHARACTER. He breaks the game not by abusing a glitch but instead by abusing the normal game mechanics. And he is the ONLY one. Do you really think that Pit's planking is gonna be that good? Really?

Basically, anti-ban is against banning a character which is literally broken. With SF2T Akuma, you won the match when your opponent ran out of life. With MK, you win the match whenever your opponent loses the lead... against the most incredibly aggressive character in the game!

If we're willing to agree that MK is broken and we're going to put a rule in place to limit him (which is scrubby and anti-competitive in the first place! It's not JUST planking! Even without planking he's incredibly overdominant! And no, I mean the idea that we make a rule to keep him in the game is scrubby because we're literally admitting that he's banned) then why not go with something more reasonable than LGLs? Like one of these:

-"MK Gay Stage" rule
-LGLs + 1-stock handicap
-LGLs + whenever the MK player uses tornado, you can punch him in the face
...etc.

I especially support the first and last suggestion!

But no, of course you won't do that. You don't want MK to be fair, you want him to be legal and still winning ****. It's like you take Barry Bonds, tell him he's making baseball unfair, and then instead of taking his steroids, you give him weighted shoes!

 

[Cold Fusion]

Alright, but when you realize that you should just ban a character instead of continuing to limit him?

Exactly. These arbitrary limitations grow in number, further implying that something is wrong with MK.

 

[Mota]

I lol'd hard at Budgets post

The punching one sounds good.

If what budget says is true, dang how is this debate still going? seems like the Brawl Community is going in circles.

There should be a frequently asked question/used arguments anti-ban uses, so pro-ban don't have to keep repeating themselves. & vice-versa, maybe.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I still have not seen an anti-ban actually argue with me on LGLs. Would appreciate it.

 

[Cold Fusion]

If what budget says is true, dang how is this debate still going? seems like the Brawl Community is going in circles.

This is a debate between two groups of stubborn people. Whenever stubborn people argue, nothing is usually resolved.

 

[GeneralWoodman]

anything can be resolved with a good swing of a very big sword. A basic brawl ike player taught me that

 

[Chuee]

You know what, I call bull****.

We have PROVEN that metaknight is broken. As in, we have proven that you can't beat him within reason if he uses the right tactic. Within reason meaning that as soon as Metaknight gets a lead and gets to a ledge with it, he wins. At this point, there's NO MORE ARGUMENT AGAINST BANNING HIM, BECAUSE HE IS A BROKEN CHARACTER. He breaks the game not by abusing a glitch but instead by abusing the normal game mechanics. And he is the ONLY one. Do you really think that Pit's planking is gonna be that good? Really?

Basically, anti-ban is against banning a character which is literally broken. With SF2T Akuma, you won the match when your opponent ran out of life. With MK, you win the match whenever your opponent loses the lead... against the most incredibly aggressive character in the game!

I think you've got the wrong game there man.
We're playing Super Smash Bros Brawl, I think you're playing Super Theory Bros Brawl.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I think you've got the wrong game there man.
We're playing Super Smash Bros Brawl, I think you're playing Super Theory Bros Brawl.

Okay, let me get this straight. You're going to disregard all the frame data collected on this subject that literally PROVES that it is unbeatable because nobody has done it in tournaments, where it's banned by a stupid rule? REALLY?

It's like I say "Tabuu's OHKO attack can be avoided if you dodge with decent timing" and you say "No, that's just in theory; it hasn't happened in tournaments yet and the frame requirements are incredibly tight!" Seriously, that's ****ing ******** Chuee. Now actually formulate an argument that doesn't come down to Ad Hominem and we can TALK.

Actually, while the above comparison is pretty much what you're doing, this one makes more sense:
I say, "Sonic can stall by running around Temple Hyrule; nobody can catch up with him." (this being backed up by frame data which, for the purposes of this argument, are real). You respond by saying "It hasn't been shown in actual play, you're just theorycrafting.

You know what, Chuee? I'm going with "You're a biased idiot". At least you aren't as bad as Gheb, who will not give ANY argument and simply comes in and says "no".

 

[Uzima (Uzi)]

omg, freaking end this crap already, what is the BBR doing about this?

beyond a shadow of a doubt MK is killing brawl and is a broken character, the only ones not saying either main him and make money of using him or well, THATS IT, only people arguing towards him staying make money of him and have a conflict of interest.

i've seen metaknight taint and ruin very good promising characters/players, ruin friendships and make *******s out of good people, HE IS PURE EVIL!!!!!!!

 

[MarKO X]

actually, there are people that legit think that MK isn't that big of a deal. they have nothing to gain from it, being cash, good tourney placings, friendships, etc... they just genuinely don't think that MK should be banned.

that don't make it right though. but seriously, what's anti-ban's argument again?

 

[Chuee]

Im biased?
No, you're the biased one.
Also, I don't reply because your posts are a bunch of whines about how planking is invincible and that whenever MK gets a lead he auto wins. Maybe if you actually said something intelligent I might respond.

 

[St. Viers]

Here is the problem with your guys' take on LGL.

It is easy to enforce the limit, and in all actuality, hard to exceed without having planked, or been forced onto the ledge by your opponent a ton (as per the DDD argument earlier this thread)*. But people bring up the fact that a LGL still allows the MK to stall by planking towards the end of the match, using up the remaining ledgegrabs in his limit.

However, I see nothing wrong with this. By defining the number of ledgegrabs, the rules would be defining the point of excessive stalling. That means that the stalling that 30/40/whatver the LGL is number of times is *acceptable,* just as CGing to 300% is. Once it goes beyond that number, however, it is considered excessive stalling and subjects the player to a DQ, just as CGing someone past 300% does.

In addition, the nature of planking is that once you start, it is hard to stop without getting hit. Lets say that by IDCing to get the complete invincibility, you avoid a snake nikita-dropping the edge. He is thereby forcing you to keep planking, or get hit, which brings you closer to the number. So if you force the MK to the edge early in the match, it is possible that by forcing him to either plank or lose the percent lead, you can cause to plank past the point where he is excessively stalling, if he had any plans on stalling the last 2 minutes by planking.

*as too the DDD example, which is one of the only cases I could see happening: If the DDD was good enough to predict the snakes every move to keep him offstage/force him to grab the ledge, without the snake either recovering to the stage or getting from ledge to stage successfully, there is *no* reason that the DDD shouldn't be given the win. Again, if you treat the LGL as a means to prevent excessive stalling, it would be agreed that the snake recovering to the ledge over and over (or the game and watch planking, or the character using tether recoveries 3 times after grabbing the ledge), once going past the LGL, was excessively stalling one way or the other (either by being outplayed and forced to the ledge, planking, or simply tether-planking the ledge too often).

This way the restriction does not affect only the MK matchup, but serves to define exactly how much grabbing of the ledge during a match for any character is too much, and punishing all characters that abuse the ledge to any degree for over abusing it.

...
As to scrooging, again, this is not a MK only ability, and a rule that affects MK is not necessarily only affecting him, but fixing a problem with the game the same way limiting stages or chain-grab durations does. By saying that one may only scrooge x times without grabbing a ledge, you prevent all characters that can scrooge (gliding characters, jigglypuff, sonic, lucas, and anyone else that can circle-camp) from stalling by going under the stage. In addition, along with a LGL, you make people trying to stall with circle-camping have to worry about being DQed for excessive ledge-stalling, as defined by the LGL.

In summary, the problem you guys have with the LGL/scrooging is that you seem to be looking at it in 2 fallacious ways.

1. Assuming that it should only affect MK, rather than limiting the ability to abuse ledgegrabs/circle-camping to stall by any character (just because MK stalls better doesn't mean other chars should be allowed to excessively stall.)

2. Acting as if said limitations are any different in rational than any other rules in the set. (for example, limiting stages, limiting chain-grab duration, limiting time, limiting items). Just because it's new and not an easily understood carry-over from *another game's rules* does not mean it is any less legitimate a limitation. The problem now is inertia--if brawl had come with a mode built in that ended the game after a certain player grabbed the edge a certain number of times, and it was decided (without melee or 64 having existed) that to limit edge abuse, using that mode to monitor the behavior, no one would have had a problem with the rule (except maybe MK mains who understood the unfair advantage of edge-play). However, because we have a firm mindset in the matter, (albeit a mindset that is ruining the game according to both sides) such a fundamental change, even if it would make the game better (as limiting stages, limiting time, limiting items) does, people are unwilling to accept it.

 

[Orion*]

I still have not seen an anti-ban actually argue with me on LGLs. Would appreciate it.

i dont really see the problem with lgls. all youve done is call them scrubby because they limit mk from planking. wich is apparently scrubby because limiting things, wich we do all the time btw is scrubby.
LETS BAN A BROKEN CHARACTER THAT DOESNT WIN TOURNAMENTS NOOB!

the worst you can say is mk can plank for like 60 seconds at the end of the match. OH NO.

 

[St. Viers]

Your way of posting does little to support your side, or garner support from people on the fence.

 

[ADHD]

How does "he's beaten me many times before this" negate the ability to use that in an argument?

Yeah, it does you ****.

 

[Orion*]

Your way of posting does little to support your side, or garner support from people on the fence.

i dont care, they arent actually going to ban mk

edit: ^ ***** taste good so im assuming thats a compliment?

 

[Asdioh]

Im biased?
No, you're the biased one.
Also, I don't reply because your posts are a bunch of whines about how planking is invincible and that whenever MK gets a lead he auto wins. Maybe if you actually said something intelligent I might respond.

He is being a little overzealous about that, but your posts have all been essentially "You're wrong. /flametrollflame"


edit: St. Viers, can you give me a summary of your post? I read the whole thing, but your standpoint is a little confusing. Are you saying LGLs are a good idea?
Did you really just say that X character deserves the win over Y character because he forced Y character to grab the ledge over Z number of ledgegrabs due to having a great edgeguarding game? O_o

 

[Orion*]

if planking is broken then i dont see why mugs arent winning with it LOL

 

[ElDominio]

Kill me.

This thread is going nowhere. We ARE going around in circles.

Fine, I'll just enjoy my 9-player expected tourneys here in PR, they are sure to be loads of fun....

And the thing about CGs to %300, they are quite hard to time and pull off...
Planking? not so much....

 

[MarKO X]

Infinite CGing forever makes the game unplayable. The opponent can't do anything within the game to stop it.
Planking with a character that is not MK does not. The player can find some form of a move that will get his opponent off the ledge and on the stage (if that opponent isn't MK).

Why is planking considered excessive stalling as opposed to maintaining an advantageous position?

Is being able to go invincible for 60 seconds at the end of a match ok?

 

[MKOwnage]

Meta Knight has not done near as well with his stalling tactics banned at our tourneys. His stage play is decent. But Ive realized its just lead to more nado spam. Still Falco ,ICs, Diddy and sometimes Snake are mostly on top now.

 

[Asdioh]

Infinite CGing forever makes the game unplayable. The opponent can't do anything within the game to stop it.
Planking with a character that is not MK does not. The player can find some form of a move that will get his opponent off the ledge and on the stage (if that opponent isn't MK).

Why is planking considered excessive stalling as opposed to maintaining an advantageous position?

Is being able to go invincible for 60 seconds at the end of a match ok?

qft.

And at your last sentence: No. Being "difficult to hit" for the last 60 seconds would be acceptable, but being literally untouchable? No. This is why LGLs fail....and that is only one reason. The fact that LGLs will be an arbitrary number that will be almost impossible to keep track of during the actual match is another reason that comes to mind why it fails.

 

[Orion*]

And the thing about CGs to %300, they are quite hard to time and pull off...
Planking? not so much....

they really arent. ive known plenty of players including myself who have just picked up the cgs lol

 

[St. Viers]

@ElDominio: Difficulty of a procedure is not relevant, which is why DDD's chaingrab and IC's CG must end at the same percent, even though:
1. DDD's standing/wall CG are much easier than IC chaingrab, and
2. IC can kill out of their CG at a much lower percent than 300% without risk.

This is why it is not unprecedented for there to be a single LGL that affects how some characters play slightly differently from others.

Also, the blatant play to one's ..sorrow?.. as to your community's plight, I have a question to ask: Were LGL established for the doubles of that event? If so, and if the other team was over the limit, it was *not* the LGL's fault you lost, but failure at the part of the TO or judge, and although I can see your anger, it's misdirected. If there was no LGL, than perhaps you shouldn't have come if you didn't expect it to be used against you. Either way, it either killed the community or didn't, but in neither case is it the fault of a LGL.

@MarKO: You contradict yourself. You say that planking is both beatable and unbeatable in the same post. Also, Lets the MK planks the last 60 seconds of the match, it means that he has *NOT* been planking the entire 7 minutes. If he's winning at that point, how is it different from an IC player getting a grab with 60 seconds left, and CGing the character up to 250% for that last minute?

Furthermore, planking isn't excessive stalling. Planking past the LGL is excessive stalling, were there a LGL, just like CGing isn't stalling, but CGing past the 300% mark is.

@The Fox Main: except that if he's planking for the last minute, it means that he can't have been using the edge much the rest of the game, meaning that if he is beating you, it isn't because of planking/circle-camping, but rather him just beating you.

Also, my post is to say the LGLs aren't inherently a bad idea, nor is a effort to prevent circle-camping. Rather, it how people go about implementing it. Also, as to the DDD thing. If a DDD player can successfully cause a snake to never properly recover, I think that he is clearly a better player than the snake. Especially if the snake player, aware of a LGL being in place, keeps going for the ledge rather than trying to recover onto the stage(something snake players usually try anyways, given the SAF granted by their UpB), I feel that it should count as the DDD's win. (though under that situation the DDD would be winning anyways, LGL aside)

 

[_Keno_]

actually, there are people that legit think that MK isn't that big of a deal. they have nothing to gain from it, being cash, good tourney placings, friendships, etc... they just genuinely don't think that MK should be banned.

That is because they are bad and havent played vs a single good MK.
And actually read stuff before you go around asking people to recycle the entire argument for the 3000th time.

"I havent seen the argument, therefore it is probably not legitimate"

 

[ElDominio]

@ElDominio: Difficulty of a procedure is not relevant, which is why DDD's chaingrab and IC's CG must end at the same percent, even though:
1. DDD's standing/wall CG are much easier than IC chaingrab, and
2. IC can kill out of their CG at a much lower percent than 300% without risk.

This is why it is not unprecedented for there to be a single LGL that affects how some characters play slightly differently from others.

Also, the blatant play to one's ..sorrow?.. as to your community's plight, I have a question to ask: Were LGL established for the doubles of that event? If so, and if the other team was over the limit, it was *not* the LGL's fault you lost, but failure at the part of the TO or judge, and although I can see your anger, it's misdirected. If there was no LGL, than perhaps you shouldn't have come if you didn't expect it to be used against you. Either way, it either killed the community or didn't, but in neither case is it the fault of a LGL.

Good post.

The only thing is that there are no MK users here.

All the good Brawl people that used to play quit since P4... thanks to something...
And it's not the LGL (which was in place at P4)

 

[DanGR]

Since when has the ability to be invincible for brief period of time been considered "banworthy"?

I happen to think this preconception is ridiculous.

edit: All of the reasons I've seen for enacting LGLs have been blanketed with an obscure "he's UNTOUCHABLE" remark or something of the like. Will anyone go beyond that? Or will I continue to facepalm at these sort of statements. I'm baffled, to be honest.

 

[PottyJokes]

going by budget's logic perfect shielding is proven unbeatable because if you perfect shield everything you'll never get hit. ban shields ok!

 

[theunabletable]

You're going to disregard all the frame data collected on this subject that literally PROVES that it is unbeatable because nobody has done it in tournaments, where it's banned by a stupid rule? REALLY?

Ban Ice Climbers. They have proven to be completely broken because with one grab they can stall out the timer. I don't care if it hasn't been done in tournament, where it's banned by a stupid arbitrary rule (why 300%? Why not 299%? Why not 301%?).

beyond a shadow of a doubt MK is killing brawl and is a broken character, the only ones not saying either main him and make money of using him or well, THATS IT, only people arguing towards him staying make money of him and have a conflict of interest.

ADHD is anti-ban IIRC.

going by budget's logic perfect shielding is proven unbeatable because if you perfect shield everything you'll never get hit. ban shields ok!

Or ban Ice Climbers because every time you hit their shield they perfectly SDI it and get a grab and take a stock.

100-0 matchups against the entire cast.

 

[St. Viers]

@DanGR: it's because people don't realize that for a MK to want to use all x ledgegrabs by planking in the last minute, they don't seem to realize that it means he can't plank much during the other 6-7 minutes, AND he has to be in the lead by the end of the match. Or at least, that's how it seems to me.


@PottyJokes: while a funny comment, it's better suited for posting on people's profile or something, as it will just give pro-ban something to comment on rather than the feeble attempts by me and other people at having a rational discussion