Official Metaknight Discussion

[Supermodel From Paris]

I think I agree more with what M2K is saying than the whole outlier thing =/

LOL, "that whole outlier thing" is one of the tenants of the science of statistics. You can't just disagree with it anymore than you can disagree with the scientific process.

I invite anti-ban to continue to denounce statistics because they don't agree with the conclusions drawn, however.

 

[Black Marf]

So, basically, you're saying we cater to the people who wouldn't win tournaments with MK gone because they aren't at the level of M2K, Ally, ADHD, DEHF, NickRiddle, TKD, etc? Or am I misunderstanding?

He's describing how to make reliable statistical analysis and why. Basically, M2K is smarter than most people at this game. Therefore, we instead look at uh... Ksizzle's results, since those results have actually been replicated and therefore are more reliable.

Really, since everybody who's commented on Crow's graphs knows all about math, science, and statistical analysis, I think we can agree that Jack's comments aren't too far out of line.

He is also trying to argue that statistics aren't important because this is a competitive video game, which is arguable but I think most would disagree.

He's also arguing a different definition of metagame than what I know.

 

[Jack Kieser]

So, basically, you're saying we cater to the people who wouldn't win tournaments with MK gone because they aren't at the level of M2K, Ally, ADHD, DEHF, NickRiddle, TKD, etc? Or am I misunderstanding?

I'm saying that we cater to the community, not to M2K.

People forget that you can have the most competitively viable game in the world, but if no one plays it, it's irrelevant. Ok, M2K is the top of the MK metagame right now. Good for him. If we cater to him, exclusively, then kiss Smash goodbye, because whether he, you, or anyone else likes it or not, the 99% of people under him also give him 99% of the money he makes to travel.

On the same note, if you do everything you can to help out Joe Smasher who can't even make it out of pools, than the game stagnates and people stop playing it because it isn't a good game anymore (inb4Brawlisabadgamejohns).

Ultimately, though, M2K is one guy. M2K, Ally, and ADHD are three guys. The top 10 ranked Brawl players are still just 10 people. I'd love to see 10 players keep the entire US Smash scene alive all on their lonesome without everyone else feeding them pot money.

We gather data for the greatest common denominator because that's what keeps the community, and thus the game, alive. Alienate everyone at the exclusive benefit of the top players, and the game dies. Top players can go, and there will always be another to replace him; when the majority leaves, the top can't be sustained.

TL;DR: M2K is necessary, but he sure as hell isn't important.

 

[Roie]

Statistics don't mean anything regarding balance. If you balance a game according to statistics you are going to have probably the worst game ever. You only balance a game in the context of the current metagame.

You guys aren't the ones winning tournaments, and shouldn't have any say in this.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Haha, statistics mean EVERYTHING to game balance if you have large and varied enough sample sizes (we do).

 

[AvaricePanda]

Either way it makes sense though.

I think what M2K is trying to say is that, like you said, sure there's the statistical side of MK's dominance (which says to leave out outliers), but because the goal of competitive video games is to see who's the best, which involves as close to the top of the metagame as you can get, and from what's shown MK isn't over dominant among the best, then it shouldn't matter too much.

On the other side, a lot of people are saying that despite the fact that MK isn't over dominating in the top levels of smash, in the high levels of smash which makes up a much larger population, he's more of a problem, and that's what's important.

They both make sense, at least to me, and they both seem important. At any rate, I find the "anti-ban you're dumb" and "pro-ban you're dumb" generalizations really inane. It's part of the reason, along with the fact that a lot of people seem to think, "GUYS I'M ANTI-BAN/PRO-BAN I MUST WIN THIS ARGUMENT AT ALL COSTS LOL", that the discussion's going nowhere and we're, aside from the charts of statistics, saying the same things that've been said since 08.

edit: in the time it took me to say this like 5 people posted lol, but Jack I noticed something you said and something a lot of people like to drop in their statements

Alienate everyone at the exclusive benefit of the top players, and the game dies. Top players can go, and there will always be another to replace him; when the majority leaves, the top can't be sustained.

This seems to be implying that leaving MK in the game will eventually lead to the game's death; how so?

 

[Roie]

Haha, statistics mean EVERYTHING to game balance if you have large and varied enough sample sizes (we do).

so if we have 10,000 people that say gannondorf is the best character because none of them are good enough to know how to stop a warlock punch, we listen to them, the majority?

Yeah, its an absurd extreme to make, but that is what you are implying.

 

[Jack Kieser]

so if we have 10,000 people that say gannondorf is the best character because none of them are good enough to know how to stop a warlock punch, we listen to them, the majority?

Yeah, its an absurd extreme to make, but that is what you are implying.

No, it's not what he's implying, which is why you're making an argument to the absurd.

What would be more accurate would be "if one person is ****** with Ganon, but no one else is, he's not really a good character".

L2Reason.

 

[Roie]

No, it's not what he's implying, which is why you're making an argument to the absurd.

L2Reason.

His argument is that statistics mean something in regards to balance. Which is incorrect. My post showed an example of where he wasn't correct. A counter-example.
L2Reason.

 

[theunabletable]

If we cater to him, exclusively, then kiss Smash goodbye, because whether he, you, or anyone else likes it or not, the 99% of people under him also give him 99% of the money he makes to travel.

If we cater to him and his opinions, we'd probably have a better game. IIRC he thinks there should be a ledge grab limit specifically for MK, G&W, and Pit just because they're gay, Brinstar and Rainbow should be banned for being gay, etc.

Honestly this game would be way less lame if we catered to M2K's opinions lol

 

[Jack Kieser]

His argument is that statistics mean something in regards to balance. Which is incorrect. My post showed an example of where he wasn't correct. A counter-example.
L2Reason.

Excuse me for a moment while I... *ahem*

lolololololololol!!

Of course statistics means something to balance! You're confusing "statistics" with "popular opinion"! How foolish you must be!

Seriously, the statistical data we receive from tournament results are a direct result of actions that are caused by the inherent balance in the game. Causation at best, correlation at worst, but still directly linked. Crow! isn't pulling his data and statistics from popular opinion or polls... he's getting it from what people are actually doing in tournaments!

What psycho-planet are you living on?

BTW: Welcome to SWF.

EDIT:

If we cater to him and his opinions, we'd probably have a better game. IIRC he thinks there should be a ledge grab limit specifically for MK, G&W, and Pit just because they're gay...

He's wrong. G&W and Pit wouldn't need them in a million years. There's no proof for that they ever would; in fact, all the proof is to the contrary. Plus, you don't restrict something because it's "gay". You restrict something because it's "too good". Another reason why he's wrong.

...Brinstar and Rainbow should be banned for being gay, etc.

Se above to why he's horribly, horribly wrong.

Honestly this game would be way less lame if we catered to M2K's opinions lol

I'm sure it would. *rolls eyes*

EDIT AGAIN @Avarice: Non-specific statement. I wasn't alluding specifically to MK being banned. I meant that if we legislate any policy that's meant only to benefit the top 3, 5, 10 players, then we'll be doing the community direct harm.

 

[Blacknight99923]

You guys aren't the ones winning tournaments, and shouldn't have any say in this.

Thats a stupid agruement. If we are the ones supporting the tournament we have a right to say what goes on with it. Btw by your logic you shouldn't be even looking in here. Being good at a game doesn't mean you know more about the game it simply means your good at it and LIKELY know a decent amount about the game.

for example the average brawler can contribute with....

staticstics: anybody who isn't a moron can read a graph and understand whats going on.

ATs: anyone can in theory find an AT

 

[Roie]

Excuse me for a moment while I... *ahem*

lolololololololol!!

Of course statistics means something to balance! You're confusing "statistics" with "popular opinion"! How foolish you must be!

Seriously, the statistical data we receive from tournament results are a direct result of actions that are caused by the inherent balance in the game. Causation at best, correlation at worst, but still directly linked. Crow! isn't pulling his data and statistics from popular opinion or polls... he's getting it from what people are actually doing in tournaments!

What psycho-planet are you living on?

BTW: Welcome to SWF.

We all suck at brawl. In 5 years, every matchup will have been revolutionized. No one is going to play the same way. (this, of course, is assuming brawl is a strategically deep game)

Similarly, 2 years ago, we knew even less about brawl. We might have said something ******** like, snake or falco are the best characters in the game? Even if 100% of tournaments won were by snakes and falcos. We don't go banning them because of statistics. They aren't overpowered characters.

Therefore: you don't rely on statistics in regards to balance.

edit:

Thats a stupid agruement. If we are the ones supporting the tournament we have a right to say what goes on with it. Btw by your logic you shouldn't be even looking in here. Being good at a game doesn't mean you know more about the game it simply means your good at it and LIKELY know a decent amount about the game.

Yeah actually that's true.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I'm not usually a mean person (I leave the anger to Thio, lol), but, Christ, you're thick! Like, really thick. "People with the downs" thick.

I just explained this. We all suck at brawl. In 5 years, every matchup will have been revolutionized. No one is going to play the same way. (this, of course, is assuming brawl is a strategically deep game)

Similarly, 2 years ago, we knew even less about brawl. We might have said something ******** like, snake or falco are the best characters in the game? Even if 100% of tournaments won were by snakes and falcos. We don't go banning them because of statistics. They aren't overpowered characters.

Therefore: you don't rely on statistics in regards to balance.

That's not statistics! That's popular opinion! If the tournament results showed that Snake or Falco were ****** more than would be healthy, then there would be cause for alarm. And I'm sure, back then, there might have been; I didn't really follow competitive Brawl in the early days. But, time passed and data changed. Opinion might not have, but the data did.

Also, if 100% of tournaments were being won by Snakes and Falcos, there totally would be cause for suspicion. I don't even think anti-ban thinks that this wouldn't be at least suspicious.

Either way, you're arguing a non point, because you don't even seem to understand what "statistics" means. Read a dictionary; until then, please stop posting.

Oh, by the way:

In 5 years, every matchup will have been revolutionized.

Prove it.

 

[Tarmogoyf]

This seems to be implying that leaving MK in the game will eventually lead to the game's death; how so?

It is an assumption, but brawl is in fact dying (or at least shrinking). Last year, national tournies were about 250-300 people each. Now, they are around 150 each. It might not be due to MK, but he is the number 1 issue on the community's mind. Maybe brawl is just a bad game, and dying for non MK reasons, but we don't know for sure. And we do know that the game has (or had, MLG might have given it new life) a shrinking scene.

Worth looking into maybe?

 

[Roie]

I'm not usually a mean person (I leave the anger to Thio, lol), but, Christ, you're thick! Like, really thick. "People with the downs" thick.



That's not statistics! That's popular opinion! If the tournament results showed that Snake or Falco were ****** more than would be healthy, then there would be cause for alarm. And I'm sure, back then, there might have been; I didn't really follow competitive Brawl in the early days. But, time passed and data changed. Opinion might not have, but the data did.

Either way, you're arguing a non point, because you don't even seem to understand what "statistics" means. Read a dictionary; until then, please stop posting.

Read the next sentence.

Not only do you know anything about balance, but you don't know how to argue. Don't call people thick; it is only detrimental to debate.

Also, popular opinion and intuition are, in fact, more reliable sources of balance than anything.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Read the edit.

Also, popular opinion and intuition are, in fact, more reliable sources of balance than anything.

Aaaaand, this is where you prove, once and for all, that you know nothing about how the real world works.

 

[DMG]

Genesis was larger than MLG Orlando. MLG Orlando didn't even reach their player cap. As far as Brawl's scene is concerned, it's shrinking OR people's expectations for large tournaments have drastically been cut back.

 

[Roie]

There's no point arguing anymore. I brought my best reasoning and you cling to really bad insults as if they are doing anything.

We aren't controlled by the numbers. We make them. Intuition > statistics.

 

[rvkevin]

We aren't controlled by the numbers. We make them. Intuition > statistics.

Intuition should be informed by evidence. In this case, the evidence is statistics.

 

[Jack Kieser]

There's no point arguing anymore. I brought my best reasoning and you cling to really bad insults as if they are doing anything.

We aren't controlled by the numbers. We make them. Intuition > statistics.

So, does that mean you'll stop posting things that make absolutely no logical sense? Or better yet, that you'll go back to lurking and stop posting altogether?

Mission accomplished.

Ok, we can get back on topic now.

 

[Raziek]

There's no point arguing anymore. I brought my best reasoning and you cling to really bad insults as if they are doing anything.

We aren't controlled by the numbers. We make them. Intuition > statistics.

You sir, are ********.

On this note: My intuition hereby declares that Ganon is the best character in the game, and should be banned. ALL IN FAVOR?

Edit: Also, Jack, I'm sigging this: "I'm not usually a mean person (I leave the anger to Thio, lol), but, Christ, you're thick! Like, really thick. "People with the downs" thick."

Edit 2: Fuuu, nevermind, it cuts off my purty signature.

 

[AvaricePanda]

It is an assumption, but brawl is in fact dying (or at least shrinking). Last year, national tournies were about 250-300 people each. Now, they are around 150 each. It might not be due to MK, but he is the number 1 issue on the community's mind. Maybe brawl is just a bad game, and dying for non MK reasons, but we don't know for sure. And we do know that the game has (or had, MLG might have given it new life) a shrinking scene.

Worth looking into maybe?

I think it's a combination of a lot of things as for why people stop playing the game, but one of the ones we can most help with is the quality of how tournaments are run in specific regions. I've made larger posts about this before, but I noticed that a lot of regions that thrive, have large amounts of competitive players, and are able to garner in a lot of players for a regional just in their state/region, are regions with excellently run tournaments (thinking of Ohio, and SoCal recently), whereas the converse is true that bad quality of tournaments = worse attendance and competition (I think MD/VA was in a slump like this in late 08-early 09).

A part of Brawl attendance slipping may also have to do with increased Melee hype though. This is a lot more of a guess than anything I've taken a longer look at and tried to back up like the above, but 08 wasn't the greatest year for Melee, and for the year of Brawl's release a lot of people were playing that game. It wasn't until about Revival of Melee (March of 09) where Melee hype really jumped through the window, and shortly after Brawl had its two biggest tournaments (APEX in May and Genesis in July). However, Genesis had a much larger Melee hype train. Where Melee steadily grew overall, Brawl steadily fell overall (I think). Looking at Pound4 especially kinda reaffirms this.
(idunnothough)

@Jack, okay, that makes sense, I was just wondering. I have my own theories about tournament attendance (in this entire discussion I think it's one of the few things I can give the most insight about) and in general, MK doesn't seem to be a major factor regarding it, if it's declining.

 

[Tarmogoyf]

We aren't controlled by the numbers. We make them. Intuition > statistics.

And 55% (roughly) of people's intuition say ban. Gets nowhere much?

@AvricePanda: I kinda agree, but melee seems to be going back into a slump after Pound4, although because of MLG brawl or jiggs dittos (lol), I don't know why. But I don't expect melee hype to last much longer. I think it was OMG Brawl sucks play melee!, followed by Melee having it's own crash (GFs were really underhyped)

 

[fkacyan]

When you're doing any sort of statistical analysis you remove outliers. That's how statistics work.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH NOOOOOOOOOO. NONONONONONONONONONONONONOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. OH MY GOD YOU MAKE ME ANGRY.

Whether or not something is an outlier depends heavily on what curve you're trying to make the data fit! Something on a one-X function might be a huge outlier but is almost on the line if you're using x^3!

Part of why people keep calling them 'outliers' is that people like Crow! are making the assumption that not placing is the norm, which from a basic statistical point is the case, but M2K makes the rather cogent argument that the metagame is the peak and not what the people below it are doing.

EDIT: @Razeik, I read your post after this, and it is amazingly appropriate. I award you one internets,.

 

[Eternal Yoshi]

It is an assumption, but brawl is in fact dying (or at least shrinking). Last year, national tournies were about 250-300 people each. Now, they are around 150 each. It might not be due to MK, but he is the number 1 issue on the community's mind. Maybe brawl is just a bad game, and dying for non MK reasons, but we don't know for sure. And we do know that the game has (or had, MLG might have given it new life) a shrinking scene.

Worth looking into maybe?

I wonder too. I doubt that the game is suffering from the Jin Kazama effect which I will call it when a character makes people sick of a game.
It must be something else.
I know the new factor is fading, but there has to be something else.
It might be a combination of little thing that add up to be a problem like BOE.
I think we should look into this more, but then again, it will only result in the resurgence of this thread.

It almost like it's defeatist.

Regardless of how and when it happens, MK will always be referred to when talked to about the subject, like the Xbox 360 and the red ring of death, whether he's responsible for it or not(though I don't think he is solely to blame).

Ninja'd again.

 

[Raziek]

EDIT: @Razeik, I read your post after this, and it is amazingly appropriate. I award you one internets,.

Hell yes, day has been made. I think that might be my first internets award.

 

[theunabletable]

He's wrong. G&W and Pit wouldn't need them in a million years. There's no proof for that they ever would; in fact, all the proof is to the contrary. Plus, you don't restrict something because it's "gay". You restrict something because it's "too good". Another reason why he's wrong.

From a logical point of view, yeah I don't think there should be an LGL for Pit and G&W, but the game would be less lame without that.

But you were saying that we should do what the community likes the most, and a game without planking is far more enjoyable...

Se above to why he's horribly, horribly wrong.

I agree that from a competetive point of view that M2K is wrong, but I know I would enjoy the game way more.

I'm sure it would. *rolls eyes*

It'd be a more enjoyable game without gay stages, but that doesn't mean we should logically get rid of those stages.

I think this game would probably be a better game without MK, but when at a top level (the level that he's beatable at) he isn't bannable, then I'd say logically we shouldn't ban him.

Just like if even though this game gets worse and gayer with Brinstar, RC, etc logically they shouldn't be banned.

Do you get what I'm saying?

And in competetive play, I still don't see why we should cater to the bad players. I mean if it ever gets to the point where the community will fall apart if MK isn't banned, then I'll probably say that he should be banned to save the community.

But that hasn't happened, yet. Atleast not where I live.

 

[Chuee]

And 55% (roughly) of people's intuition say ban. Gets nowhere much?

@AvricePanda: I kinda agree, but melee seems to be going back into a slump after Pound4, although because of MLG brawl or jiggs dittos (lol), I don't know why. But I don't expect melee hype to last much longer. I think it was OMG Brawl sucks play melee!, followed by Melee having it's own crash (GFs were really underhyped)

If you're referring to the ban polls, those polls are really inaccurate seeing as how there were people making alt accounts and various other stuff to get their position to win the poll.

 

[Raziek]

If you're referring to the ban polls, those polls are really inaccurate seeing as how there were people making alt accounts and various other stuff to get their position to win the poll.

I sincerely doubt there were enough people doing this to influence it significantly. Also, your argument works from both sides, so it's a moot point regardless.

 

[fkacyan]

I sincerely doubt there were enough people doing this to influence it significantly. Also, your argument works from both sides, so it's a moot point regardless.

The problem with the poll is actually self-selection bias, in addition to the lack of an 'indifferent' option.

 

[Kaffei]

Excuse my intrusion. Has anything changed on the stance of the MK ban issue so far

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

who cares of how much players proved themselves. MK players travel a lot and EC has constant tourneys

Felix is a really good player, but Washington has very small tourneys and not very often, so he doesn't get a chance to go to them often

that's why that list is stupid

edit - you guys don't get it

the best player of each character should represent the character the most

just because the 2nd best like Zero Suit Samus or whatever is not nearly as good as the best one does not mean ZSS is a bad character and Nick Riddle (the outlier ZSS) shouldn't count. You have to base off the TOP LEVEL of the characters. THAT IS THE CURRENT METAGAME FOR THAT CHARACTER

taking away the outliers is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you should be doing

If people really thought like that then whats to stop you from losing a few tournaments in a row on purpose if mk reaches 75% dominance?

Then everyone would go forget the 75% dominance san just beat m2k for the 2nd time.

 

[Mew2King]

i don't let people beat me -_-

 

[o-Serin-o]

We talking just Brawl?

Cuz Ally and ADHD are people, right?



And if we talking Melee:

Mango, Zhu, and Armada are people too, right?

 

[Clel]

I do!!! Don't worry folks, I'll get known real fast and then let San fsmash me three times on Battlefield, this just might work!

 

[fkacyan]

@ Crow!

Could you possibly post dominance percentages for the top four characters if you only take into account:

- the highest scoring player for that main
- the two highest scoring players
- three three highest scoring players

In other words, three data sets using the peak of the metagame as the sole standard for dominance. I'm just interested in seeing what the dominance looks like. ^_^

 

[Kaffei]

We talking just Brawl?

Cuz Ally and ADHD are people, right?



And if we talking Melee:

Mango, Zhu, and Armada are people too, right?

No, they are smash gods.

 

[Mew2King]

there is only one good player for each character for most of the characters

however the top 4 or 5 players in the game are still me, ally, adhd, dehf, and then it's up in the air for who would be after that. Maybe some order of TKD/Dojo/Tyrant or something. It's pretty balanced at the top.

 

[CO18]

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.

tkd won 1mk ditto out of 4 most of his losses he was 2 stocked pretty sure. His won win was a 2 stock but tyrant sded