Official Metaknight Discussion

[adumbrodeus]

Okay, I'm going to spell things out for you slowly. This way I'll know that if there was any misunderstanding, I should kick you in the head.

If

TOURNAMENT ATTENDANCE

does not decrease

then there is no problem.

If

MORE PEOPLE PLAY THAT CHARACTER

but

TOURNAMENT ATTENDANCE STAYS THE SAME

then things are fine.

It clearly suggests that playing Meta Knight is a favorable choice over quitting the game.

However, if

TOURNAMENT ATTENDANCE FALLS SIGNIFICANTLY

then there is a problem.

That is when quitting the game is more favorable than playing Meta Knight.

I see your point, but unless there's a reason other then simple popularity, then the metagame should be self-correcting.


Assuming that MK is the actual reason that attendance is decreasing, which needs proof in and of itself.

Occam's razor is not proof, is that's what you're getting at. I don't think I can answer this in a way that will completely satisfy you.

I would have to go and list every reason why all other characters aren't popular, beyond being bad, for high level play I think?

No... you account for population in your statistics, like EVERYTHING ELSE FOR STATISTICS, find your population, randomly sample and average.

Adumbrodeus:

I already controlled for popularity by using only the tournaments with the most entrants (150+). The most popular character in Melee was Link; we did not see a majority of Link mains in the top 10. As time goes on, yes, better characters can get better numbers, but this is irrelevant when you are considering the top 8 of a national tournament. The best characters played by the best players get there. It doesn't matter if they are the only ones playing the character or not; there could be 8 MKs or 8,000 MKs and you'd have the same top players there. Popularity isn't a factor because using only the top 8 of a large tournament naturally uses a weighted scale; only the GOOD characters are up there.

If you're saying that MK is just popular BECAUSE he's so good and that's why we see so many, you're claiming there is another problem: that no one else is good.

In addition to this, you need an alternate explanation as to why the results happened the way they did. You can't dismiss a statistical trend spanning about two years, two different entry brackets, and only the highest level of play at the time of each tournament by saying "that character was popular". If the character was merely popular, you'd have to explain why the character was able to do what other characters could not.

*sigh*


The point is you don't know how much of an effect number of mains of a given character has without applying it in your calculations, therefore you can draw no conclusions beyond, "maybe there's an effect".

 

[Zankoku]

I see your point, but unless there's a reason other then simple popularity, then the metagame should be self-correcting.


Assuming that MK is the actual reason that attendance is decreasing, which needs proof in and of itself.

If the (absolute) number of Meta Knight players remains relatively constant but the overall number of players decreases, I think I can make a pretty **** good guess.

 

[adumbrodeus]

If the (absolute) number of Meta Knight players remains relatively constant but the overall number of players decreases, I think I can make a pretty **** good guess.

Well then prove that, and convince people that it's bannable.

 

[Tien2500]

Well then prove that, and convince people that it's bannable.

There is really no way to prove this unless you tracked down everyone who quit Smash and asked them for a reason.

Very few studies EVER show causation and causation is very rarely demanded even for studies with far wider ramifications than the banning of MK. Causation can usually only be proven with very simple variables and incredibly regulated studies which would not likely be possible in this scenario. It would probably be impossible to make an experiment that would isolate the variable of MK and repeat it enough times to show causality.

All we can really do in Smash is look at the trends and at best you could find a correlation and honestly that's the best you can do in most cases with more than two variables. Really if you ask for absolute proof for anything to be done than nothing can ever be done.

 

[adumbrodeus]

There is really no way to prove this unless you tracked down everyone who quit Smash and asked them for a reason.

Very few studies EVER show causation and causation is very rarely demanded even for studies with far wider ramifications than the banning of MK. Causation can usually only be proven with very simple variables and incredibly regulated studies which would not likely be possible in this scenario. It would probably be impossible to make an experiment that would isolate the variable of MK and repeat it enough times to show causality.

All we can really do in Smash is look at the trends and at best you could find a correlation and honestly that's the best you can do in most cases with more than two variables. Really if you ask for absolute proof for anything to be done than nothing can ever be done.

I've always been taking this from a statistical basis, which isn't proof positive, but it is proof enough.

 

[Tien2500]

I've always been taking this from a statistical basis, which isn't proof positive, but it is proof enough.

So what burden of proof are you demanding?

 

[Zankoku]

Well then prove that, and convince people that it's bannable.

Prove what? I've given a valid, countable set of parameters to observe and I already know its answer with regards to my region (attendance has fluctuated up and down, including number of Meta Knight players), so I don't really care to check. I've just been determining something to look at because pro-ban keeps coming up with things that anti-ban's like "but you can't use that to prove anything!" against.

 

[IrisKong]

our region only has 1 mk so its hard to see what people are complaining about from our end, lol, although i agree, ban the **** thing, haha

EDIT, sorry, maybe we can boost that number to about 3 (forgot about ohio)

 

[clowsui]

ohio has
capem
z (comes rarely though)
kel
os
fizzle
dj iskaskribble

so 5 active mks in ohio if you don't count z...with judge is 6. 7 including Z

 

[Punishment Divine]

ohio has
capem
z (comes rarely though)
kel
os
fizzle
dj iskaskribble

so 5 active mks in ohio if you don't count z...with judge is 6. 7 including Z

8 if you include M2-****ING-K.

Rofl how you miss that?

 

[WillLi]

This is my first post here but I'm gonna say this anyway.

I've always been taking this from a statistical basis, which isn't proof positive, but it is proof enough.

Well statistically speaking there are 37 characters in Brawl and in Pound 4 MK appeared 6 times in the top 8. My math might be a little wrong but there seems to be only a [3.9x10^-8]% chance of that occurring. Without there being a strong influence, other then he's cool then everyone present at Pound4 witnessed an honest to goodness miracle.

 

[Overswarm]

Or a curse.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Possible reasons MK is the most popular character...

1) People just love the Kirby series... Just not the protagonist... or antagonist...
2) Masks are cool.
3) He kind of reminds you of Batman.
4) Sakurai brainwashed everyone.
5) He's dead sexy.
6) He's shiny. People like shiny things.
7) He's far better than everyone else in the cast.

Those are the only possible reasons I could think of.

I LOL'd so hard

 

[Tien2500]

This is my first post here but I'm gonna say this anyway.



Well statistically speaking there are 37 characters in Brawl and in Pound 4 MK appeared 6 times in the top 8. My math might be a little wrong but there seems to be only a [3.9x10^-8]% chance of that occurring. Without there being a strong influence, other then he's cool then everyone present at Pound4 witnessed an honest to goodness miracle.

Hmmm... How'd you get that figure exactly?

Edit: Glad you liked it SFP. Btw you're in NY now right? Just out of curiousity are there any locals that you know of? PM me if you want since that's kind of off topic.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Well statistically speaking there are 37 characters in Brawl and in Pound 4 MK appeared 6 times in the top 8. My math might be a little wrong but there seems to be only a [3.9x10^-8]% chance of that occurring. Without there being a strong influence, other then he's cool then everyone present at Pound4 witnessed an honest to goodness miracle.

This post is ****.

 

[WillLi]

Hmmm... How'd you get that figure exactly?

MK is 1 of 37 characters so (1/37) chance that he'll be picked with no biases. Then you just do that 5 more times. This is not including the fact that you have a limited number of slots. This is jsut the chance of the same character being picked 6 times in a row.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

I'm confused, is anti ban claiming that tournament results can't be used to show that MK is ban able now?

 

[Omni]

This is my first post here but I'm gonna say this anyway.



Well statistically speaking there are 37 characters in Brawl and in Pound 4 MK appeared 6 times in the top 8. My math might be a little wrong but there seems to be only a [3.9x10^-8]% chance of that occurring. Without there being a strong influence, other then he's cool then everyone present at Pound4 witnessed an honest to goodness miracle.

*Facepalm.*

And the fact that people take statistics like this to heart makes me cry even more inside. I'm not even going to go into a lecture.

I guess that means the chance of a Diddy taking 1st place in this statistically improbable situation should result in an even more dramatically small %.

 

[Zankoku]

MK is 1 of 37 characters so (1/37) chance that he'll be picked with no biases. Then you just do that 5 more times. This is not including the fact that you have a limited number of slots. This is jsut the chance of the same character being picked 6 times in a row.

That seems to be a rather silly way to determine the odds of Meta Knight appearing 6 times in the top 8 of a given tournament.

 

[Tien2500]

MK is 1 of 37 characters so (1/37) chance that he'll be picked with no biases. Then you just do that 5 more times. This is not including the fact that you have a limited number of slots. This is jsut the chance of the same character being picked 6 times in a row.

Ah ok I gotcha. I was just a bit confused because of the way it was written since you're on a comp and all. Does it change the math that it doesn't have to be 6 times in a row and rather only 6/8?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Too bad you're like the only one who read it.

It was worth reading.

 

[Espy Rose]

*Facepalm.*

And the fact that people take statistics like this to heart makes me cry even more inside. I'm not even going to go into a lecture.

I guess that means the chance of a Diddy taking 1st place in this statistically improbable situation should result in an even more dramatically small %.

Actually, according to his logic, it's 1/37 for Diddy Kong.

Hey, don't shoot me, I'm just sayin'.
*Doesn't care about half of this nonsense anymore.*

 

[Punishment Divine]

This is my first post here but I'm gonna say this anyway.



Well statistically speaking there are 37 characters in Brawl and in Pound 4 MK appeared 6 times in the top 8. My math might be a little wrong but there seems to be only a [3.9x10^-8]% chance of that occurring. Without there being a strong influence, other then he's cool then everyone present at Pound4 witnessed an honest to goodness miracle.

That would work IF players had to pick their character and skill (somehow) at random. Many other factors must be taken into account. Although I lean toward pro-ban, this evidence does not coincide with the topic at hand.

 

[Tien2500]

That seems to be a rather silly way to determine the odds of Meta Knight appearing 6 times in the top 8 of a given tournament.

I don't think he's trying to show the odds of this happening IF MK is balanced with the rest of the cast.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

That seems to be a rather silly way to determine the odds of Meta Knight appearing 6 times in the top 8 of a given tournament.

It's still an awesome post (but not because it proves anything).

He would be correct if the game was balanced completely and everyone chose random the whole tourney. ;P

 

[WillLi]

*Facepalm.*

And the fact that people take statistics like this to heart makes me cry even more inside.

I guess that means the chance of a Diddy taking 1st place in this statistically improbable situation should result in an even more dramatically small %.

Not as small as the chance of MK occurring that much. But you obviously did not read -all- of my post. That's the chance of it occurring without any given reason. So luck and chance are negligable. Or do you want to try and calculate the chance of 6 people 'random;y picking MK cause he's cool then actually being good with to make it to the top 9 then the chance of them all being in the same tourney? There a major reason MK is showing up alot, and it's not cause he's cool.

It's still an awesome post (but not because it proves anything).

He would be correct if the game was balanced completely and everyone chose random the whole tourney. ;P

That's the point I'm going with, things obviously aren't balanced, and they're obviously in MK's favor.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I don't think he's trying to show the odds of this happening IF MK is balanced with the rest of the cast.

Check your PMs, Tien.

 

[Zankoku]

I don't think he's trying to show the odds of this happening IF MK is balanced with the rest of the cast.

I don't think the odds mean anything useful to begin with. They are, like SFP said, closest to the probability of 6 Meta Knights appearing in the top 8 of a tournament assuming everyone picked Random for the first round and stuck with that character for the remainder of the tournament.

 

[Omni]

Not as small as the chance of MK occurring that much. But you obviously did not read -all- of my post. That's the chance of it occurring without any given reason. So luck and chance are negligable. Or do you want to try and calculate the chance of 6 people 'random;y picking MK cause he's cool then actually being good with to make it to the top 9 then the chance of them all being in the same tourney? There a major reason MK is showing up alot, and it's not cause he's cool.

Coming up with that statistic does not prove anything. Why would you give us this statistic when it doesn't really tell us anything about... anything?

You can't ignore:
1.) That the majority of the Top 8 are MK mains.
2.) That MK is the best character in the game.
3.) That MK is the most popular and overused character in the game.

Suddenly, that statistic doesn't seem so improbable or unrealistic.

MK is showing up a lot because he's the best character in the game. Does this not compute?

 

[Flayl]

If we ran MK banned tournaments, and statistics showed there still was a dominant character, wouldn't we be right back where we started?

Is there any way running MK banned tournaments can help the anti-ban's cause? It seems it would either help pro-ban (if there is no dominant character) or do nothing at all (if there's another dominant character).

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I don't think the odds mean anything useful to begin with. They are, like SFP said, closest to the probability of 6 Meta Knights appearing in the top 8 of a tournament assuming everyone picked Random for the first round and stuck with that character for the remainder of the tournament.

I think the point he was trying to make was that people are picking MK for a reason and NOT randomly, because if it was random then what pound 4 was, was a statistical miracle; he is saying that it ISN'T random, and that there's obviously a reason he pops up so much.

I think everyone agrees that MK is the best character to play if you want to win, though.

I have a question: assuming (this may or may not be true) that MK was the only thing stopping the game from being more balanced, and that an MK-less game created a harmony in game balance that was signigicantly significant as an improvement, is MK bannable to anti-ban? I realize that's obviously not the case and that there will still be good and bad characters, I'm just being hypothetical.

 

[-Ran]

Here's a novel idea, instead of saying we need a majority to get MK banned in a vote....

How about, we have a vote and if we have a majority, Mk doesn't get banned. =)

 

[Punishment Divine]

If we ran MK banned tournaments, and statistics showed there still was a dominant character, wouldn't we be right back where we started?

Is there any way running MK banned tournaments can help the anti-ban's cause? It seems it would either help pro-ban (if there is no dominant character) or do nothing at all (if there's another dominant character).

If the tournaments showed that Snake or Diddy took all the top spots, it would be in benefit of the anti-ban side. It would prove that if MK were banned, another character would simply take his place. This, of course, would need a few tournaments to back it up, however

 

[Flayl]

If the tournaments showed that Snake or Diddy took all the top spots, it would be in benefit of the anti-ban side. It would prove that if MK were banned, another character would simply take his place. This, of course, would need a few tournaments to back it up, however

No, because pro-ban could chant POPULARITY or what have you.

 

[Omni]

I have a question: assuming (this may or may not be true) that MK was the only thing stopping the game from being more balanced, and that an MK-less game created a harmony in game balance that was signigicantly significant as an improvement, is MK bannable to anti-ban? I realize that's obviously not the case and that there will still be good and bad characters, I'm just being hypothetical.

Awkwardly phrased.

Assuming:
1.) MK is the only thing stopping the game from being more balanced.
2.) MK-less game created a harmony in game balance that was... significan... eh.

It seems like both your points mean the same thing.

However, your assumption is not wrong, SFP.

Removing Metaknight from the cast will make more characters viable. The "best" threshhold will most likely be shared with 3-4 characters.

What is your point?

 

[swordgard]

I think the point he was trying to make was that people are picking MK for a reason and NOT randomly, because if it was random then what pound 4 was, was a statistical miracle; he is saying that it ISN'T random, and that there's obviously a reason he pops up so much.

I think everyone agrees that MK is the best character to play if you want to win, though.

I have a question: assuming (this may or may not be true) that MK was the only thing stopping the game from being more balanced, and that an MK-less game created a harmony in game balance that was signigicantly significant as an improvement, is MK bannable to anti-ban? I realize that's obviously not the case and that there will still be good and bad characters, I'm just being hypothetical.

No, see my signature for details.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I meant "statistically significant" and made a few other mistakes. Sorry, I was distracted.

Removing Metaknight from the cast will make more characters viable. The "best" threshhold will most likely shared with 3-4 characters.

What is your point?

I wasn't getting at anythign specific when I asked.

But really, that's the pro-ban stance; a metagame with 3-5 top characters and a few that are just under them but still competitive is ideal when compared to one character that consistently dominates. If you disagree, then you disagree, but that is just where we disagree; nothing else can really be said.

However, I do want to say that I don't really care what SF communities or the SRK do, and that just because there have been games in other communities with one dominant character doesn't mean that it's an ideal scenario and that said character should not have been banned.

 

[WillLi]

Coming up with that statistic does not prove anything. Why would you give us this statistic when it doesn't really tell us anything about... anything?

You can't ignore:
1.) That the majority of the Top 8 are MK mains.
2.) That MK is the best character in the game.
3.) That MK is the most popular and overused character in the game.

Suddenly, that statistic doesn't seem so improbable or unrealistic.

MK is showing up a lot because he's the best character in the game. Does this not compute?

I love how you're giving me more fuel. Again what are the chances of those people maining MK well enough to be the top 8? Obviously there's a reason so many people can get far with MK ?

And yes that is the reason, he's undisputedly the best. Which in it self is a problem. It's kind of like sending amateur boxers to fight world rankers. If people think the odds of you winning go up simply because you pick a specific character. Then that's a sure clue that said character is probably OPed. Honestly is there a reason to be anything except for MK? Barring the fact that some people might not be good with him. If I was say proficient with every character, what need would I have to main anyone aside from MK?

Yes he is the most popular, but then against guns are popular for war. Cause it's easy to kill people with, not cause it's cool.

 

[Zankoku]

Which in it self is a problem. It's kind of like sending armature boxers to fight world rankers. If people think the odds of you winning go up simply because you pick a specific character. Then that's a sure clue that said character is probably OPed. Honestly is there a reason to be anything except for MK? Barring the fact that some people might not be good with him. If I was say proficient with every character, what need would I have ot main anyone aside from MK?

It's that same reasoning that makes the rest of the community look like total morons for not picking Meta Knight, and all Meta Knight players look incompetent by not taking first place. >_>

 

[Punishment Divine]

I love how you're giving me more fuel. Again what are the chances of those people maining MK well enough to be the top 8? Obviously there's a reason so many people can get far with MK ?

And yes that is the reason, he's undisputedly the best. Which in it self is a problem. It's kind of like sending amateur boxers to fight world rankers. If people think the odds of you winning go up simply because you pick a specific character. Then that's a sure clue that said character is probably OPed. Honestly is there a reason to be anything except for MK? Barring the fact that some people might not be good with him. If I was say proficient with every character, what need would I have to main anyone aside from MK?

Yes he is the most popular, but then against guns are popular for war. Cause it's easy to kill people with, not cause it's cool.

Again, slightly pro-ban but disagreeing with you. How is being a dominant character a bad thing? Do you see people in the SF4 community yelling "Ban Sagat!" or the like, or the Blazblue community asking to ban V-13?

There will be a dominant character, it's when the character begins to over-centralize tournaments and the community where it becomes a problem.

No, because pro-ban could chant POPULARITY or what have you.

But that doesn't speak as loudly as facts. As I said, it's not guaranteed to help anti-ban but it COULD help