Official Metaknight Discussion

[ksizl4life]

I think you should add atomsk to the list and remove ksizzle (since he doesn't play as much anymore) and seibrik.

You could also add ally's mk from when he was using him strictly.

as for lowing the bar isn't it already at 2 wins to make the list? everybody can just look for them self if one person beat them once.

well after mlg i told everyone id be active again lol

but it seems to be helping anti ban sooo

never mind

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

BPC: If his stance is anything like mine he's pro-evidence.

Hmm. Proposal: officially change pro-ban to pro-evidence and anti-ban to anti-realism. :V

Also, that reminds me-is it possible any more to set a dominance criteria that both sides would be okay with? Like, possible at all?

 

[DMG]

No.

Not possible.

 

[Raziek]

No.

Not possible.

This.

We have about 10,500 posts + 3 public polls that attempted to do this. It's not happening.

 

[Tarmogoyf]

4 polls actually lol. It's too subjective, some people would be ok with 95% dominance, some not ok with 20.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

well after mlg i told everyone id be active again lol

but it seems to be helping anti ban sooo

never mind

nah cause atomsk can beat adhd so that would take adhd off the beat top mks twice.

Jking you should be more active i actually like watching your tornado juggling.

 

[ThatsGameBoyz]

I like your first post.
Other examples are of course Akuma in Street Fighter, & I've heard of pokemon bans in Competitve Pokemon.

I agree, MK isn't broken to be banned, but he's broken enough to make the game his b**ch. He's the best choice, yet people still choose to play as rock/paper/scissors instead of the superior spock.

I like Spock.

lol, thanks. Let's just say I've been lurking for a hella long time.

I guess if people's goal is to create a metagame in which a wider variety of characters can thrive, then a metaknight ban would be acceptable.

 

[Black Marf]

I can see both sides of this argument being valid. The prospect of entirely banning a character is a big one.

My argument for banning goes something like this:

Suppose you have a complicated game of rock paper scissors where, instead of paper beating rock 100% of the time, this occurred with probability 3/4. So every time you play a match with someone else. You are expected to win this game 50% of the time, not taking skill into account.
Suppose you add in Spock. Spock has a 50% chance to win against himself, and a 60% chance to win against everybody else. it is clear that when I play Spock against a field of rock paper and scissors I'll win 60% of the time.

Does this mean, however, that Spock will win all the time? No, but does it mean that Spock is more likely to win than any other strategy in the game? Most certainly.

If metaknight were to be banned, it would take on a more rock paper scissorsesque form, and I would predict that many different characters would start to arise at the tops of tournaments.

Does this mean that metaknight is "broken?" not really, he just has been shown to have an above 50% chance against every other character.

This is very common in fighting games, and is usually considered to have not enough justification to ban a character.

Having a dominant character is fine. The point in contention is how dominant a character has to be before he is banned.

I know that in card games when there is unbalance and a particular archetype is winning way too much or a card is overplayed, it is banned in order to sustain a healthy metagame. Are there any examples of that in video games?

Akuma. Also, Magic experience suggests that if MK was a card/deck he wouldn't even be considered for banning. It takes a lot to remove something in those games.

Card games and fighting games are different phenomena, they do not operate using the same ideals.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

No.

Not possible.

This.

We have about 10,500 posts + 3 public polls that attempted to do this. It's not happening.

4 polls actually lol. It's too subjective, some people would be ok with 95% dominance, some not ok with 20.

How do those who are against a ban until there's a solid criteria which is fulfilled react to this?

 

[Nefarious B]

Ksizzle proban too?

 

[fkacyan]

How do those who are against a ban until there's a solid criteria which is fulfilled react to this?

Well, a rather significant portion of the community (Close to 50%) voted not to ban him. Multiple times.

What is "Clearly the answer is not an outright ban"?

 

[ThatsGameBoyz]

This is very common in fighting games, and is usually considered to have not enough justification to ban a character.

Having a dominant character is fine. The point in contention is how dominant a character has to be before he is banned.

Akuma. Also, Magic experience suggests that if MK was a card/deck he wouldn't even be considered for banning. It takes a lot to remove something in those games.

Card games and fighting games are different phenomena, they do not operate using the same ideals.

That makes sense that having a dominant character is common. Are there any other games where there has been a character that has been superior in every matchup and was still allowed to be in tournaments? Examples would be nice.

I think that Metaknight can be easily comparable to something like Sensei's divining top in extended magic, or some deck like affinity in both standard and extended. Affinity was not by any means totally dominating the format when all of the cards in it got banned (from what I remember, at least before skullclamp existed), and neither was top. In both situations though, both top and affinity were played enough and had good enough matchups against everything in the format (in top's case, it was just an inherently good card) that WotC decided to ban them. However, WotC also does extensive testing in their department to try and balance the metagame, and if they feel that it is unbalanced they remove a component to try and balance it as much as possible (whereas the makers of smash could care less about the competitive community from what I've seen).

Although they are different phenomena, I feel that the number of viable decks in a card game tournament is proportional to the number of viable characters at a smash brothers tournament, and although they require different skill sets, the match-up analysis that you can apply to them is somewhat similar. I could be silly though, and they could be totally incomparable for reasons beyond that.

 

[swordgard]

I am pro-evidence indeed.


Flayl, atomsk is a top MK too now, add him to your list.

The more I look into other different communities though, the more I realize the only reason there are not more MKs is because the smash community plays for fun 20 times more than the SF community. Whether MK should be banned is one thing, but from what I gathered he is largely underplayed atm especially considering the current CP system we have.


Would also like to point out it seems meep is no longer as interested in playing ics. -1 MK slayer maybe?

 

[Espy Rose]

Smashers play for fun much, much more than they play-to-win, sword.

That alone should be obvious enough.
That's why C and B tier characters are still played.

 

[Black Marf]

That makes sense that having a dominant character is common. Are there any other games where there has been a character that has been superior in every matchup and was still allowed to be in tournaments? Examples would be nice.

Well let's look at a matchup chart for a REAL fighting game that REAL men play, SF4.
http://www.eventhubs.com/guides/2008/oct/17/street-fighter-4-tiers-character-rankings/

Sagat looks like MK and Ryu/Akuma also look pretty good.

Card game stuff

I could look up match stuff, but right now my internet's failing and they aren't similar scenarios anyway. At least with MtG decks you get a good amount of variation within the theme, and one good card is only at max 1/15th of a deck.

 

[Remzi]

Yea, meep went at least like half MK last tourney.

 

[ThatsGameBoyz]

Well let's look at a matchup chart for a REAL fighting game that REAL men play, SF4.
http://www.eventhubs.com/guides/2008/oct/17/street-fighter-4-tiers-character-rankings/

Sagat looks like MK and Ryu/Akuma also look pretty good.

True. He has a few more 50/50 matchups than mk does, but it's very comparable. How dominant is he in tournaments, and has there been a discussion like this in the street fighter community? I'm just curious.

I could look up match stuff, but right now my internet's failing and they aren't similar scenarios anyway. At least with MtG decks you get a good amount of variation within the theme, and one good card is only at max 1/15th of a deck.

They're definitely different games, I'll give it that much. However play skill between the two games is comparable in that being a better player/deckbuilder gives you a huge edge. If one is working in a known environment, being skillful and creative is key in both games. I won't deny the differences at all though, they're totally different beasts, and obviously the general outlook of the creators behind each of the games was vastly different upon creation. They're only loosely comparable in the sense of statistics.

I think that one of the biggest things that brawl has going for it is that it is primarily played for the purposes of fun, and the tournament scene, while it exists, is not nearly as evolved as it could be. Right now there is a big reward for players who can win with mediocre characters (BigLou!) that, in a sense, can outweigh the prize support, so it is easy to see a mixture of different characters anywhere.

However, if prize support grows to the amount that magic has it at right now (40K for first) I would predict a harsh drop in the number of B and C tier characters and a larger number of S and A tier characters.

My prediction ahead of time is going to be that the average amount of mks/top 8 in the mlg series is going to be 50%. We'll see though.

 

[Jem.]

Didn't TKD not prove himself anywhere but in cali?

Just sayin.


Also more characters fall to the challenge everyday, ADHD for example, Ally re-starting to lose to M2k. Does WC know the matchup also vs fox? Who knows, 1 person placing in 1 single region=/=no ban.

The point is that Tyrant placed 3rd as MLG, 2nd highest placing Metaknight. But, as you say, this unproven lad who only competes in Cali beat him.. With Fox. What's that say about other characters? I'm sick of people saying "only special people can beat metaknight" anyone can beat a top metaknight without MK.

 

[Turbo Ether]

What does Fox do to win against MK?

 

[fkacyan]

What does Fox do to win against MK?

His usual shenanigans: Punish people for not knowing how to punish dair, airstall to bait moves into dair, and then wait for somebody to use a laggy move and use his ridiculously fast upsmash to kill.

I've never seen any Fox do anything but this to any character ever, actually.

 

[AlMoStLeGeNdArY]

What does Fox do to win against MK?

Kill him 3 times?

 

[fkacyan]

Kill him 3 times?

Herpdy derpdy do!

 

[Blacknight99923]

Kill him 3 times?

As much as this is abslolute fact I feel this deserves a
NO **** SHERLOCK

sorry i had to


I would think it would have to do with forced approuch in a neutral situation stall, and punish that lag with the rapesmash

 

[Turbo Ether]

His usual shenanigans: Punish people for not knowing how to punish dair, airstall to bait moves into dair, and then wait for somebody to use a laggy move and use his ridiculously fast upsmash to kill.

I've never seen any Fox do anything but this to any character ever, actually.

Lol, yeah, I have to agree.

 

[MarKO X]

hmm...

i think Mk should be more compared to HDR Akuma in terms of tier position and matchups:
http://www.eventhubs.com/guides/200...er-2-turbo-hd-remix-tiers-character-rankings/

especially since HDR Akuma is considered a "rebalanced" ST Akuma and still ended up getting banned in Evo2k9.

 

[Eternal Yoshi]

The more I look into other different communities though, the more I realize the only reason there are not more MKs is because the smash community plays for fun 20 times more than the SF community. Whether MK should be banned is one thing, but from what I gathered he is largely underplayed atm especially considering the current CP system we have.

I doubt that. IIRC, many of the high level players in Smash(not just the MKs) play primarily for money.

Is there a way for there to be a tourney that has excellent seeding that can be used for debate and not be extremes like Genesis(the MKs that didn't make it to the top 12 got beaten by other MKs, Ally, and ADHD in bracket) and Pound 4(No explanation needed)?

 

[Judo777]

When dealing with SF4 ur forgetting very huge factor. Sagats matchups dont significantly increase from game 1 to game 2 and vice versa for other. If sagat always had at worst a 5-5 MU on akuma game 1 then a possible 6-4 on him game 2 then id bet he would be. More so if he had a 5.5-4.5 on ryu and then a possible 6.5 3.5 on game 2 that was unavoidable then i bet he would too.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

This.

We have about 10,500 posts + 3 public polls that attempted to do this. It's not happening.

Are people gonna realize that people are going to disagree with the ban or not ban no matter what we do?

 

[Jem.]

Fox also does grab release into upsmash and will kill MK around 80-90 depending on stage. and lots and lots of laser camping. I noticed TKD is really good at reading MK's jumps when they're dair camping and punishing it with usmash/whatever he wants.

 

[etecoon]

fox can't really force an air release on MK, it only happens due to improperly mashing

 

[swordgard]

Fox also does grab release into upsmash and will kill MK around 80-90 depending on stage. and lots and lots of laser camping. I noticed TKD is really good at reading MK's jumps when they're dair camping and punishing it with usmash/whatever he wants.

This should never work. Ever.

And its not like MK D-Air camping is his best option vs fox at all.

 

[Raziek]

When did this become the Fox matchup discussion? I'd say we should get back on topic, but I'm pretty sure a lot of people are just using this for a postcount +1 at this point.

At any rate, TKD beating MK's with Fox doesn't mean that Fox is all of a sudden good against Meta-Knight.

See: ADHD (Circa Pound 4) and Ally (Shhhnnnaaaaaaake)

It's just another outlier situation.

 

[OverLade]

It's possible that Fox actually does really well vs MK but only at the level TKD plays him.

It's possible that TKD is better than Tyrant (keep in mind he also beat him in MK dittos), but most people don't realize that as things like powershielding and punishing become more consistent, how good MK is begins to saturate. So a fox vs a MK that are at level 30 might be like 65:35, while a fox vs MK that are at level 100 might be 45:55.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

I can't wait till san beats a good mk, it will be like ike vs mk at level 50 is 90-10 but ike vs mk at level 100 is probably 50-50.

 

[OverLade]

Na tbh I dont think it will happen. As good as San is, Ike is still Ike, and any top MK that knows the matchup won't lose to him.

<3manigSantho

edit:
BTW feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I can't wait till san beats a good mk, it will be like ike vs mk at level 50 is 90-10 but ike vs mk at level 100 is probably 50-50.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This is so sad it's funny.

 

[Judo777]

I dont think that is accurate honestly. Power shielding is great dont get me wrong but the issue with being able to powershield that consistently would mean that u would have to be predicting ur opponent which is not a stretch. However let us remember that this is a fighting game and that all fighting games are based around the fact that if u can predict ur opponent u can punish them everytime no matter who u are. There are very few situations in fighting games where if u know exactly what ur opponent is doing u cant hit em for it. The reason power shielding happens so often is because it is the safest option i u predict wrong. If snake knows MK is gonna shuttle loop he can jump up and uair mk for it after he dodges or w/e. The same is true for everyone fox just has a stronger move to punish with then most people.

So i guess yes at the level of play where u can predict ur opponent all the time a Fox or rather the strongest character would probably win but that will never be achieved because perfect prediction is impossible. If im luigi and i know that ur gonna run fwd and dsmash with MK i can time my spot dodge and upb u for it.

I would argue that the only main difference between high and low level play is that at high level of play there are less chances for punishing mistakes and that both players approach situations differently then low level. However i dont believe that matchups should really change that much provided both people dont play absolutely reatrdedly.

 

[Raziek]

I can't wait till san beats a good mk, it will be like ike vs mk at level 50 is 90-10 but ike vs mk at level 100 is probably 50-50.

One problem I have with this sort of concept is that people tend to apply it in places where it is clearly the player, not the character.

For example, if ADHD is the only Diddy who reliably beats MKs, you don't say the match-up is in favor at the highest-level, because nobody else is at the highest level. If ADHD is the only one who can do it, it's because he's extremely skilled AT the matchup, not because the match-up magically changes at high levels. Characters retain all the same tools, regardless of what skill you are.

Same thing goes for TKD and Fox, San and Ike, and all these other attributions people like to make, that no other player is replicating on that "level".

Skill at the match-up =/= The match-up is less against them.

 

[fkacyan]

One problem I have with this sort of concept is that people tend to apply it in places where it is clearly the player, not the character.

For example, if ADHD is the only Diddy who reliably beats MKs, you don't say the match-up is in favor at the highest-level, because nobody else is at the highest level. If ADHD is the only one who can do it, it's because he's extremely skilled AT the matchup, not because the match-up magically changes at high levels. Characters retain all the same tools, regardless of what skill you are.

Same thing goes for TKD and Fox, San and Ike, and all these other attributions people like to make, that no other player is replicating on that "level".

Skill at the match-up =/= The match-up is less against them.

People totally don't do this to MK mains.

 

[Raziek]

People totally don't do this to MK mains.

Do you mean to suggest that we do this to all MK mains? I would agree that some people do this in regards to Mew2King, but the sheer number of high placing MK mains makes it highly obvious that it isn't just the player, it's the character.

When we have a long list of people like (inb4namesearch):
Dojo
Tyrant
Atomsk
KSizzle
Shadow
etc etc,

I find it very difficult to believe that these people are ALL playing at the top of their field.

When there are this many, they are clearly not outliers.