Official Metaknight Discussion

[AvaricePanda]

Him being broken is too much of a subjective point to argue, but I just feel like if the questions:

What problems, if any, are MK causing to the Brawl competitive scene?
What is going to be accomplished by banning MK?

don't have clear answers, then a ban is not worth considering.

About IDC for non-stalling tactics, I say oh well. It's a slight negative outcome for MK out of removing a concrete stalling tactic (and I honestly can't think of many situations where a non-stalling-IDC is even useful). Also remember that matches aren't judged by robots. In most cases there's a 3rd party spectator, an instant replay hack, or maybe a TO, but at the very least there's the word of the competitors. If an MK uses IDC for a second to retreat or something, it's up to the TO or helpers to decide if it's worth getting DQd for.

About TOs modifying rules to keep MK in, why not? What is wrong with trying to keep that playerbase coming to your tournaments? If the alternative is outright banning MK at your tournament, I'd much rather put in an LGL (no scrooging rules I don't even get, nor do I see how scrooging's broken but I don't know enough about it and it's a different issue anyway).

If MK is universally banned and any MK players want to keep playing Brawl, they'll still have to be forced to switch mains but at least go to X tournament. If MK is universally legal but X tournament has MK banned, more likely than not they'd just go to a different tournament some other location/weekend rather than lose with a character they're bad with or don't enjoy.

(sorry I kinda did that response out of order)

 

[Crow!]

About IDC for non-stalling tactics, I say oh well. It's a slight negative outcome for MK out of removing a concrete stalling tactic (and I honestly can't think of many situations where a non-stalling-IDC is even useful).

Try it yourself. The uses are numerous, and it's actually pretty cool.

Also remember that matches aren't judged by robots. In most cases there's a 3rd party spectator, an instant replay hack, or maybe a TO, but at the very least there's the word of the competitors. If an MK uses IDC for a second to retreat or something, it's up to the TO or helpers to decide if it's worth getting DQd for.

Fun fact: extension of the dimensional cape is actually DOES happen at tournaments (it's a good move!) and it IS wittnessed. But apparently, so far nobody has enforced it, ever. And this is of little surprise; the current rule fails to define what constitutes a use of the "infinite" dimensional cape "glitch."

About TOs modifying rules to keep MK in, why not?

Because it stands against any sense of competitive responsibility... see the next few items.

What is wrong with trying to keep that playerbase coming to your tournaments?

If being denied their unfair advantage is sufficient to make them stop attending, let them stop. But most people are better than that, I believe, and soon would be having more fun than they ever could have as MK.

If the alternative is outright banning MK at your tournament, I'd much rather put in an LGL

You had asked what is wrong with modifying the rules to keep MK around. Here's one of the reasons why this particular rule fails: the LGL introduces a new victory condition to the game. If the LGL is made small enough to prevent any subtstantial amount of planking, it allows characters (such as MK!) to pressure their opponent into regrabbing the ledge repetitively until the LGL is exceeded, and then stall only well enough to not lose all 3 stocks. So, depending on the number chose, LGLs either are ineffective, will actually make victories by stalling easier than it was before in some cases, or both simultaneously!

If you'd rather play a "better" version of Brawl than one we can obtain by choosing the game settings in a particular way, head to the Smash Workshop and check out some of the codesets there. The standard Brawl scene has no business telling players to pretend they're in an alternate reality where Brawl's mechanics are different than what they truly are.

 

[MarKO X]

lol Crow... I didn't even think of that.
You know now there are LGLs where if you go over the limit, even if the match doesn't run out of time, you can make someone grab the ledge the given number of times, and then suicide the rest of your lives and be like, "check the LGs."

rofl. that sounds silly and improbable, but i'd do it.

as far as non-stalling IDC is concerned:
- use during the start of your opponent's new stock to match them with invincibility frames.
- travel from one side of the stage to the other, like a teleport
- slighty alternative use to a shield or spotdodge
- avoid final smashes (lol)
- alternative to scrooging.

 

[dainbramage]

You had asked what is wrong with modifying the rules to keep MK around. Here's one of the reasons why this particular rule fails: the LGL introduces a new victory condition to the game.

To play devil's advocate, ignoring sudden death and deciding the winner based on % is the same thing.

 

[Raziek]

lol Crow... I didn't even think of that.
You know now there are LGLs where if you go over the limit, even if the match doesn't run out of time, you can make someone grab the ledge the given number of times, and then suicide the rest of your lives and be like, "check the LGs."

rofl. that sounds silly and improbable, but i'd do it.

as far as non-stalling IDC is concerned:
- use during the start of your opponent's new stock to match them with invincibility frames.
- travel from one side of the stage to the other, like a teleport
- slighty alternative use to a shield or spotdodge
- avoid final smashes (lol)
- alternative to scrooging.

Not exactly. The LGL only comes into effect if the timer runs out. If you SD all 3 stocks, you just lost the game.

Also, you just lost the game.

 

[MarKO X]

there are a number of tourneys that have set up the LGL such that if you exceed the LGL, you lose, whether the time ran out or not.

so in those particular tourneys that explicitly say that if you exceed the LGL with or without the game going to time, you lose, you could force an opponent to grab the ledge too many times, SD, and then call for the ledges.

like i said, silly and improbable, but i would so do it if the opp came up.

 

[theunabletable]

^I did that to a Pit recently. It was kinda funny

 

[Luigi player]

there are a number of tourneys that have set up the LGL such that if you exceed the LGL, you lose, whether the time ran out or not.

That's stupid though.

so in those particular tourneys that explicitly say that if you exceed the LGL with or without the game going to time, you lose, you could force an opponent to grab the ledge too many times, SD, and then call for the ledges.

like i said, silly and improbable, but i would so do it if the opp came up.

You don't even have to kill yourself. You can stand there and do nothing, because you win no matter what happens, lol.

 

[Mota]

http://allisbrawl.com/blogpost.aspx?id=62195

I'm officially pro-ban.

Win, oh god so much win

 

[Orion*]

^I did that to a Pit recently. It was kinda funny

what actually. is the point of placing that rule?
it just defeats the purpose of lgls -.-

 

[Tarmogoyf]

as far as non-stalling IDC is concerned:
- use during the start of your opponent's new stock to match them with invincibility frames.
- travel from one side of the stage to the other, like a teleport
- slighty alternative use to a shield or spotdodge
- avoid final smashes (lol)
- alternative to scrooging.

Add to this completely unreadable and probably unstoppable approaches/retreats. You never know when MK can come out of IDC and attack, so it's impossible to punish.

Honestly, who can anyone believe being invisible and invincible not completely break the game? You are literally bypassing game mechanics.

 

[gamesuxcard]

everytime I read an account named tarmogoyf talking about how anything else is too good I laugh.

 

[Tarmogoyf]

Shut up. I can be smothered/pathed/terminated. Cryptic/bolt can't.

 

[gamesuxcard]

But you're twoooo mana.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

everytime I read an account named tarmogoyf talking about how anything else is too good I laugh.

If there was rep here I'd +rep you.

 

[Crow!]

Add to this completely unreadable and probably unstoppable approaches/retreats. You never know when MK can come out of IDC and attack, so it's impossible to punish.

Honestly, who can anyone believe being invisible and invincible not completely break the game? You are literally bypassing game mechanics.

Have you actually played against a MK using the cape to its fullest extent for non-stalling purposes? Have you used it that way yourself? That you have made the above comments strongly suggests to me that you haven't.

Yes, the cape is a really good move. But punishing it is actually a lot easier than you might think, for essentially the same reasons you don't usually see the un-extended cape used much in tourney matches.

 

[fkacyan]

Shut up. I can be smothered/pathed/terminated. Cryptic/bolt can't.

Just rename yourself Black Lotus or something.

 

[ph00tbag]

To play devil's advocate, ignoring sudden death and deciding the winner based on % is the same thing.

For the record, I think Sudden Death should be played out.

 

[fkacyan]

For the record, I think Sudden Death should be played out.

To see who can dodge bombs better?

-_-

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

To see who can dodge bombs better?

-_-

This I kind of have to agree with. Of all the things we ban (items, stages, etc.) that should be part of the game, this is the most obvious one. It's less "who can dodge bombs better" and "who can plank better", tbh.

 

[salaboB]

Have you actually played against a MK using the cape to its fullest extent for non-stalling purposes? Have you used it that way yourself? That you have made the above comments strongly suggests to me that you haven't.

Yes, the cape is a really good move. But punishing it is actually a lot easier than you might think, for essentially the same reasons you don't usually see the un-extended cape used much in tourney matches.

Did anyone get a real chance to practice working the non-stalling IDC into their regular play before the whole thing was banned?

 

[ph00tbag]

This I kind of have to agree with. Of all the things we ban (items, stages, etc.) that should be part of the game, this is the most obvious one. It's less "who can dodge bombs better" and "who can plank better", tbh.

Look at it this way: Sudden Death comes up only if both players have the same number of stocks. This means that either the match was played very campy, or someone stalled when they only had a percent lead. Then, when you're in sudden death, the game waits several seconds before dropping bombs. Until then, you have a wealth of opportunities to find holes in your opponent's defense, and capitalize on them. The threat is thus: If you stall, or play too defensively against an opponent with whom you are evenly matched, your result will be determined randomly. No one wants that, so that should be incentive to be more aggressive.

Essentially, it counteracts campy play between opponents who are evenly matched. If you're not the type of player who actively seeks openings, then you **** well better get good at dodging bob-bombs.

Now, it doesn't solve stalling when there's a stock lead, but except for MK, no character that I'm aware of actually has a broken stalling method.

 

[Tarmogoyf]

Have you actually played against a MK using the cape to its fullest extent for non-stalling purposes? Have you used it that way yourself? That you have made the above comments strongly suggests to me that you haven't.

Yes, the cape is a really good move. But punishing it is actually a lot easier than you might think, for essentially the same reasons you don't usually see the un-extended cape used much in tourney matches.

How do you punish the extended cape exactly? You can't tell when your opponent is going to come out at all, or how. Unlike the regular cape, it doesn't have a set time limit on when it comes out, so you can approach easily without any risk of your opponent hitting you. They have to predict when you are coming out, because you can sit there forever and wait for them to make a mistake.

Or maybe my reaction time is just terrible, because I can't ever stop an attack out of the IDC.

 

[fkacyan]

How do you punish the extended cape exactly? You can't tell when your opponent is going to come out at all, or how. Unlike the regular cape, it doesn't have a set time limit on when it comes out, so you can approach easily without any risk of your opponent hitting you. They have to predict when you are coming out, because you can sit there forever and wait for them to make a mistake.

Or maybe my reaction time is just terrible, because I can't ever stop an attack out of the IDC.

Your opponent has to stop flicking his C-stick, so just look at his hands.

 

[Tarmogoyf]

Your opponent has to stop flicking his C-stick, so just look at his hands.

Oh god lol I never thought of that. I always try to react to them coming out of the cape.

 

[Judo777]

Your opponent has to stop flicking his C-stick, so just look at his hands.

Yea watch ur opponents hand then watch as they hit u with DC upon reappearence cause u arent watching the screen.

 

[gamesuxcard]

If there was rep here I'd +rep you.

I'll take an e-high five instead, huzzah.

 

[Will.]

everytime I read an account named tarmogoyf talking about how anything else is too good I laugh.

As a Legacy player, Goyf has finally found a niche in the metagame and isn't the absurdly broken guy he once was when he was introduced.

I'm not incredibly familiar with the tournament Smash scene, but it seems like there's a much better comparison between Flash and Meta than Goyf and Meta.

 

[gamesuxcard]

goyf is still busted in extended and when he WAS in standard was the mk. everytime I played him I felt like I was cheating.

also omg hi first post!

 

[DaomarIsBear]

I like how all the magic references bring long time lurkers out of hiding.

 

[MarKO X]

what actually. is the point of placing that rule?
it just defeats the purpose of lgls -.-

DINGDINGDING!

Add to this completely unreadable and probably unstoppable approaches/retreats. You never know when MK can come out of IDC and attack, so it's impossible to punish.

Honestly, who can anyone believe being invisible and invincible not completely break the game? You are literally bypassing game mechanics.

You make it seem like MK's DownB doesn't have 17 frames of startup and 27 frames of cooldown. lol
and the camera follows MK. If MK is honestly doing the IDC for too long, you could in fact call him for stalling.
but honestly, three to four extra taps of the cstick doesn't keep him invisible for that long. it'll extend it just enough to maybe gain an advantage, but not enough for people to be like... hmmmm, he IDC'd, he should be DQ'd.

try it.

For the record, I think Sudden Death should be played out.

MK can win every sudden death.

Look at it this way: Sudden Death comes up only if both players have the same number of stocks. This means that either the match was played very campy, or someone stalled when they only had a percent lead. Then, when you're in sudden death, the game waits several seconds before dropping bombs. Until then, you have a wealth of opportunities to find holes in your opponent's defense, and capitalize on them. The threat is thus: If you stall, or play too defensively against an opponent with whom you are evenly matched, your result will be determined randomly. No one wants that, so that should be incentive to be more aggressive.

Essentially, it counteracts campy play between opponents who are evenly matched. If you're not the type of player who actively seeks openings, then you **** well better get good at dodging bob-bombs.

Now, it doesn't solve stalling when there's a stock lead, but except for MK, no character that I'm aware of actually has a broken stalling method.

MK can plank, scrooge, and IDC bombs. lol

 

[gamesuxcard]

If sudden deaths were played out people would camp harder.

 

[ph00tbag]

MK can win every sudden death.

MK can plank, scrooge, and IDC bombs. lol

Did I forget to say, somewhere along the line, that I think MK shouldn't be banned?

If sudden deaths were played out people would camp harder.

You wanna back this up, or something? This is the logical equivalent of a three-year-old saying, "nuh-uh!" After their parent has given them a fair reason to go to bed on time.

 

[gamesuxcard]

No one wants to approach when they're about to die or even when they have the lead, why would someone approach when they're at 300% and the other character, say a mk, has faster moves for killing them with one misclick. Bombs would start falling and no one would leave their respective ledges.

 

[Uzima (Uzi)]

DINGDINGDING!


MK can win every sudden death.


MK can plank, scrooge, and IDC bombs. lol

Doesnt that just say everything.

a game mechanic DESIGNED to kill everyone randomly after a certain amount of time, and metaknight can survive it no problem.

 

[MarKO X]

Did I forget to say, somewhere along the line, that I think MK shouldn't be banned?

not quite sure what that has to do with what I said.

Doesnt that just say everything.

a game mechanic DESIGNED to kill everyone randomly after a certain amount of time, and metaknight can survive it no problem.

Super Sonic, a game mechanic (aka Final Smash) DESIGNED to kill everyone AT WILL, and metaknight can survive it no problem.

but that's kinda sorta unfair because neither are used in tourneys....

 

[ph00tbag]

No one wants to approach when they're about to die or even when they have the lead, why would someone approach when they're at 300% and the other character, say a mk, has faster moves for killing them with one misclick. Bombs would start falling and no one would leave their respective ledges.

And the winner would be randomly decided based on who got hit first when they weren't in ledge invincibility. Who wants that? Certainly not the MK, maybe not the other player, unless they suck, but then I doubt their opponent would have let it go to Sudden Death anyway. Unless they both suck, in which case, who cares?

Basically, either you play really stupidly campy and get really good at Sudden Death, or you just step up and learn to play safely aggressive so you don't have to go to Sudden Death. Note: it's not like being good at Sudden Death is an illegitimate skill.

not quite sure what that has to do with what I said.

The best argument you can come up with for keeping a scrubby, surgical rule in place is that Metaknight would be broken with it in place. Go figure.

(Hint: Add it to the list of things we have to have to keep MK from being broken.)

 

[Tarmogoyf]

And the winner would be randomly decided based on who got hit first when they weren't in ledge invincibility. Who wants that? Certainly not the MK, maybe not the other player, unless they suck, but then I doubt their opponent would have let it go to Sudden Death anyway. Unless they both suck, in which case, who cares?

Except MK is never vulnerable with Cape planking. He is invulnerable from dropping off the edge until he becomes invulnerable from the cape, and then invulnerable from the auto-sweetspot. Maybe the other player can try edgehogging Mk through the bombs lol.

 

[MarKO X]

The best argument you can come up with for keeping a scrubby, surgical rule in place is that Metaknight would be broken with it in place. Go figure.

(Hint: Add it to the list of things we have to have to keep MK from being broken.)

either i'm really really slow for still not getting it the following statement or

Did I forget to say, somewhere along the line, that I think MK shouldn't be banned?

should be fixed.

 

[adumbrodeus]

You wanna back this up, or something? This is the logical equivalent of a three-year-old saying, "nuh-uh!" After their parent has given them a fair reason to go to bed on time.

Planking > Sudden Death bombs.


I am perfectly willing to plank you for a week while waitng for you to go onto the stage and get killed by the bombs.