Official Metaknight Discussion

[Overswarm]

Omni has made a habit of ignoring every single one of my posts save for my initial one (which he ignored the reply to with a "it's too long"), so I don't really feel he's up to date on what we've discussed. I see him saying things like

Tournament results have shown a large multitude of players taking 1st in their region and on a national level.

and that's just silly.

We've got the data to show that, other than cherry picking tournaments (Omni's favorite past-time)... he's incorrect.

We have a grand total of 6, count 'em, 6 players beating the top MKs consistently. 6. Six beating the Nine top MK players.

Of ALL the players in Brawl, when faced against the nine "top" MKs, we have six players beating them. We can't even latch onto hope of a character because they all play different characters. The only overlap is Snake, with Ally and Razer.

Did I mention "consistently"? I mispoke. I meant "more than once".


Really now Omni, if you're going to ban yourself to stay away from these threads and ignore all my posts, you could at least address them all when you come back with all this new free time. I even linked to some of the big ones in the SBR for you. Not to toot my own horn, but I'm kinda leading the charge as far as data is concerned.




I'd also like to add one more thing:


"We shouldn't ban Metaknight because Street Fighter"

is not an argument. If anything, it shows pre-determined bias and a closed mind to the process. I've learned half a dozen characters, compared frame data, invented several ATs from my own testing, invented the character back room for ROB mains hoping to get a conclusion to the MK problem, and have even recently been analyzing the Diddy vs. MK matchup as deeply as I can. I've studied this in and out for a year and a half and have learned everything I could get my hands on and have even recently been sitting down and playing against Mew2King trying to find weaknesses to the character.

You should at least open yourself up to the possibility that Metaknight should be banned. If you're coming into the argument the same way a preacher comes in saying there shouldn't be kissing in church, do we really need to convince you?

You think I'm going into this thinking "I want Metaknight banned", but that is untrue. I want Metaknight to not be a problem. If he's banned, he's not a problem. If I found a way to beat him, I'd use it, but there is none. Never has been, nor will there be by any stretch of the imagination. All the data I have accumulated has shown the gap widening, not closing. It only gets worse.

 

[Allied]

Overswarm is leading the charge

lol

btw OS there is a way to beat him its called learn the MU

mad players have done it you sound like pro-ban fiction "I don't have to time to get better or study the frame data to win" when does anyway LOL

 

[Tien2500]

Overswarm is leading the charge

lol

Its been that way since MK started winning.

 

[Overswarm]

Its been that way since MK started winning.

I was actually one of the biggest anti-ban members at first. >_>

Then I did research and saw what he was gonna do and have grown more vehement ever since.

btw OS there is a way to beat him its called learn the MU

mad players have done it you sound like pro-ban fiction "I don't have to time to get better or study the frame data to win" when does anyway LOL

I did learn the matchup. I'm not too bad at MK dittos now. Works out well.


Did I also mention I rarely, if ever, lost to MK as ROB? I practiced at least 3 hours a day and focused most of it on troublesome characters like D3 and MK in the early days of Brawl, and it worked out well for me... sometimes. Then I played DSF, who knew the matchup. I got 2 stocked. I then picked up MK for the first time and beat him in a MK ditto 1v1 immediately after being 2 stocked with my main who I had built the metagame for, won dozens of tournaments, and had practiced daily with. That's called a "clue", and was the beginning of my research.

 

[Tien2500]

I was actually one of the biggest anti-ban members at first. >_>

Then I did research and saw what he was gonna do and have grown more vehement ever since.

Eh. I guess you probably know better than me but I remember you being pretty pro-ban from very early on in the debate.

 

[Overswarm]

Eh. I guess you probably know better than me but I remember you being pretty pro-ban from very early on in the debate.

I posted only in the SBR. I started posting publicly when people dragged their feet and felt that it wasn't something that needed to be seriously discussed.

 

[Eddie G]

Overswarm is leading the charge

lol

btw OS there is a way to beat him its called learn the MU

mad players have done it you sound like pro-ban fiction "I don't have to time to get better or study the frame data to win" when does anyway LOL

Until I see an "Allied" winning any kind of significant tournaments those kinds of statements hold no weight. Not that they ever did, anyway.

Looks like you should start "learning the MU" a little more yourself until that happens. ;D

 

[Tien2500]

I posted only in the SBR. I started posting publicly when people dragged their feet and felt that it wasn't something that needed to be seriously discussed.

Well that would explain it. We commoners have no idea what goes on in the SBR

 

[Allied]

Its been that way since MK started winning.

Lol ok have fun with your general of the charge

I was actually one of the biggest anti-ban members at first. >_>

Then I did research and saw what he was gonna do and have grown more vehement ever since.



I did learn the matchup. I'm not too bad at MK dittos now. Works out well.


Did I also mention I rarely, if ever, lost to MK as ROB? I practiced at least 3 hours a day and focused most of it on troublesome characters like D3 and MK in the early days of Brawl, and it worked out well for me... sometimes. Then I played DSF, who knew the matchup. I got 2 stocked. I then picked up MK for the first time and beat him in a MK ditto 1v1 immediately after being 2 stocked with my main who I had built the metagame for, won dozens of tournaments, and had practiced daily with. That's called a "clue", and was the beginning of my research.

It makes sense but then again thats called a bad MU i used to think i do well kirby vs marth until i faced a amazing marth player and i got 2 stocked

now i have snake thats very common in competitive fighting games you pick up a backup or a new main. Also just because you picked up MK first try and did well doesn't mean your a genious or MK is that good he carries you, i picked up sagat once online and i got 5th on a online tournament because i wasn't confident in my zangief and i knew 2 things

if they get close DP
if they are far away Fireball

... got me 5th

is sagat broken, no? lol

Eh. I guess you probably know better than me but I remember you being pretty pro-ban from very early on in the debate.

I posted only in the SBR. I started posting publicly when people dragged their feet and felt that it wasn't something that needed to be seriously discussed.

Because it doesn't lol its just i guess smashboards isn't used to having a best character

 

[MKOwnage]

I'm sure this has probably mentioned a thousand times, but I've been living under a rock for the past few days.

What do people from both sides think of a temp-ban? Like a 3-6 month MK ban?

Well maybe to see how things play out without him?

 

[Allied]

Until I see an "Allied" winning any kind of significant tournaments those kinds of statements hold no weight. Not that they ever did, anyway.

Looks like you should start "learning the MU" a little more yourself until that happens. ;D

Lol so i have to win tournaments now? i just got back into the scene a week ago from a 6 month hiatus because i've been working full time @_@ i don't have to prove really anything i've beaten ranked NJ metaknights before and contended with the best

right now i'm still just relearning the MU's because i dont even have a wii and i do fine against people lol i mostly play melee now because everyone around here just plays that

Just because your from ohio (<3 god kais) and your a peach main i met from this thread doesn't mean i demean any statement you say lol as far as i know your like every other peach main

 

[Overswarm]

Lol ok have fun with your general of the charge



It makes sense but then again thats called a bad MU i used to think i do well kirby vs marth until i faced a amazing marth player and i got 2 stocked

now i have snake thats very common in competitive fighting games you pick up a backup or a new main. Also just because you picked up MK first try and did well doesn't mean your a genious or MK is that good he carries you, i picked up sagat once online and i got 5th on a online tournament because i wasn't confident in my zangief and i knew 2 things

if they get close DP
if they are far away Fireball

... got me 5th

is sagat broken, no? lol





Because it doesn't lol its just i guess smashboards isn't used to having a best character

Oh dear. You are correct. If only I had thought to learn another character as a secondary. That would have solved my you are high sir.

 

[Tien2500]

I don't think you would win doing that as Sagat in real SF4 tournaments. Last I heard Sagat doesn't place nearly as well as MK.

 

[Allied]

Oh dear. You are correct. If only I had thought to learn another character as a secondary. That would have solved my you are high sir.

lol? so now we go into personal attacks because i'm displaying my opinion? My bad overswarm general of the pro-ban attack i guess i am high for thinking i can tell you that

My bad !

btw overswarm your kinda cute with your opinionated attacks on anti-ban

@ tien

Not saying i ever would tien i'm just displaying the point its funny how a character i don't ever use did better than a character i put LOADS of time into
but it doesn't mean hes broken bro hes the best character i'm not comparing him to MK hes got the same quality as him though hes the best character of his game

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

lol? so now we go into personal attacks because i'm displaying my opinion? My bad overswarm general of the pro-ban attack i guess i am high for thinking i can tell you that

My bad !

btw overswarm your kinda cute with your opinionated attacks on anti-ban

If you ever see a lot of OS's posts a lot, you'll see he always gets obnoxious after a while into a discussion. Just his nature I guess

 

[Tien2500]

Well maybe to see how things play out without him?

It would be hard to really generate enough data in that period of time. 3 months is definitely too short but even 6 months is less than ideal.

 

[Allied]

If you ever see a lot of OS's posts a lot, you'll see he always gets obnoxious after a while into a discussion. Just his nature I guess

yeah i don't blame him thats why i'm not stooping down to that level and personally attacking him

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

It would be hard to really generate enough data in that period of time. 3 months is definitely too short but even 6 months is less than ideal.

But, this is exactly what we need. This would ultimately determine how much of an influence MK has on the scene. If we eliminate MK for the roster for a time and see what really happens, this would prove or disprove OS's idea that only those that do well against MK are those that place high.

If however those same characters time and time again where placing in the same spots like when MK was around, then it would prove that MK really has no effect on tournaments.

 

[Tien2500]

lol? so now we go into personal attacks because i'm displaying my opinion? My bad overswarm general of the pro-ban attack i guess i am high for thinking i can tell you that

My bad !

btw overswarm your kinda cute with your opinionated attacks on anti-ban

@ tien

Not saying i ever would tien i'm just displaying the point its funny how a character i don't ever use did better than a character i put LOADS of time into
but it doesn't mean hes broken bro hes the best character i'm not comparing him to MK hes got the same quality as him though hes the best character of his game

Street Fighter is a much different game though. The characters all have relatively the same physics governing them (i.e. Sagat doesn't have 5 jumps or anything) combos work equally well on all characters and characters have access to the same techs. Breaking through Sagat's defenses is a ***** but if you could do it a few times you can have him KOed. You get through MK's defense and he resets so you have to break through again.

I might not have explained that right but the point I was trying to make is that SF4 is too different to compare.

 

[Allied]

But, this is exactly what we need. This would ultimately determine how much of an influence MK has on the scene. If we eliminate MK for the roster for a time and see what really happens, this would prove or disprove OS's idea that only those that do well against MK are those that place high.

If however those same characters time and time again where placing in the same spots like when MK was around, then it would prove that MK really has no effect on tournaments.

so you guys want to temp ban MK?

 

[Allied]

Street Fighter is a much different game though. The characters all have relatively the same physics governing them (i.e. Sagat doesn't have 5 jumps or anything) combos work equally well on all characters and characters have access to the same techs. Breaking through Sagat's defenses is a ***** but if you could do it a few times you can have him KOed. You get through MK's defense and he resets so you have to break through again.

I might not have explained that right but the point I was trying to make is that SF4 is too different to compare.

For that instance i was explaining it doesn't matter that it was a different game the point of it was that i picked up the best character in the game and i did amazing

that was the point i would say that for tekken 6/Guilty gear/TvC vs Capcom/whatever

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

so you guys want to temp ban MK?

First off, I really have no say in wether or not he gets banned or not, so it really doesn't matter what my opinion is or not. But, my opinion regarding MK is neutral. If he gets widely banned, it's one less MU to worry about. If not, then I better get used to it.

I do however think it would be interesting to see what would happen if MK was gone. Mock trial MK not being in the scene and see what really happens. The data gathered from this after a prolonged period of time would be give one side momumental evidence to support their opinion.

 

[Allied]

First off, I really have no say in wether or not he gets banned or not, so it really doesn't matter what my opinion is or not. But, my opinion regarding MK is neutral. If he gets widely banned, it's one less MU to worry about. If not, then I better get used to it.

I do however think it would be interesting to see what would happen if MK was gone. Mock trial MK not being in the scene and see what really happens. The data gathered from this after a prolonged period of time would be give one side momumental evidence to support their opinion.

Would be cool but thats too crazy to do because all regions TO's would have to comply and all players and i already know for a fact it would start off as a negative impact because so many MK mains would be most likey quitting (at least NY/NJ would quit LOL)

too messy =S i still think the people who place high would continue to place high just without MK

like Hobo Tournaments

 

[Spelt]

There's no way the majority of MKs would quit.
they'd just pick up snake/diddy.

 

[Omni]

OS. We've addressed this in the backroom. Don't act like this is new news.

I'm not responding to excessively large points. I'll be happy to address each point individually, but you don't want to present your argument in that manner. Therefore it doesn't get addressed.

But since you've made a decently sized post I'll be happy to respond:

Omni has made a habit of ignoring every single one of my posts save for my initial one (which he ignored the reply to with a "it's too long"), so I don't really feel he's up to date on what we've discussed.

Addressed in the Backroom. I told you that I do not like going back and forth so my initial post was to be taken as just my view point. I'm also very up to date; just because I don't absorb myself constantly in this thread doesn't mean I'm not reading it. I'm not going to post everytime I see a point that I disagree with because I see too many of them.

After a few dozen pages of seeing the same thing it gets really tedious answering the same questions again.

We've got the data to show that, other than cherry picking tournaments (Omni's favorite past-time)... he's incorrect.

By cherry picking, you mean Omni looking over the past month tournament results i.e. recent tournament results that accurately reflect how our current metagame is shaping...

...as opposed to showing charts and graphs that have data that reflects a metagame over a 2 year time span that loses the weight it holds because it does not take into consideration how much growth has been shown over said years.

We have a grand total of 6, count 'em, 6 players beating the top MKs consistently. 6. Six beating the Nine top MK players.

Of ALL the players in Brawl, when faced against the nine "top" MKs, we have six players beating them. We can't even latch onto hope of a character because they all play different characters. The only overlap is Snake, with Ally and Razer.

Did I mention "consistently"? I mispoke. I meant "more than once".

We have a grand total of 0, count 'it, 0 players beating the top Jigglypuff player consistently. Is that how we're doing this?

We have a grand total of 1, count it, 1 Metaknight with a winning record against ADHD.

What's your point, Overswarm?
9 Top MK players.
6 NON-MK players beat them consistently.
3 of the 9 Top MK players are not beaten consistently.

I'm not surprised by this statistic nor do I see it as "evidence" that proclaims MK needs to be banned. MK is consistently losing to certain non-MK players; you like to call them outliers, I call them players who spent the most time on their character and on the game. Regardless, the absolute fact is that Metaknight is losing consistently at high/mid levels of play. It just may not be happening as often as you like.

Really now Omni, if you're going to ban yourself to stay away from these threads and ignore all my posts, you could at least address them all when you come back with all this new free time. I even linked to some of the big ones in the SBR for you. Not to toot my own horn, but I'm kinda leading the charge as far as data is concerned.

I banned myself because I had a ****load of school work to do, and I was constantly getting IM's and PM's in my inbox about how you created a thread and how unfair of an approach you took and how someone needs to make a new thread up and etc.

However, I am not obligated to go through your extremely long posts and put up with a tit-for-tat line-by-line analysis with you. Been there; done that. It only leads to MK not being banned and the same will happen this time.

And yes, you are leading the "charge" as far as data is concerned. Your point? Your data has different interpretations; your interpretation of the data you have presented is not the absolute interpretation. With that said, this same argument has been addressed by several players in this thread about how data is just that... data.

I hate to break this to you, OS, but "data" is not what's going to ban MK. The data coupled with your interpretation is YOUR reasoning on why YOU believe MK should be banned, but the same does not hold true for everyone else.

I'd also like to add one more thing:


"We shouldn't ban Metaknight because Street Fighter"

is not an argument. If anything, it shows pre-determined bias and a closed mind to the process. I've learned half a dozen characters, compared frame data, invented several ATs from my own testing, invented the character back room for ROB mains hoping to get a conclusion to the MK problem, and have even recently been analyzing the Diddy vs. MK matchup as deeply as I can. I've studied this in and out for a year and a half and have learned everything I could get my hands on and have even recently been sitting down and playing against Mew2King trying to find weaknesses to the character.

Why are you deliberately dumbing down my arguments?

I have used Street Fighter as well as other successful competitive fighting games as a comparative icon in terms of finding the relationship between certain metagames. It would be ignorant to ignore the fighting game community and only focus on Brawl when there is plenty of viable information out there that can help determine how to approach Metaknight. The fact that you keep your eyes focused ONLY on Brawl makes me think you're not looking outside the box of what an actual competitive fighting game is and how issues like these have been addressed in a very similar fashion in very similar communities.

The Street Fighter results, that you continue to brush off, shows a metagame that is currently similar to Brawl's metagame in terms of character dominance... except the character dominance is more. Yet when I bring in these interesting facts and results from other fighting game communities that are successful, I get:

"Brawl isn't SF!" or "Brawl is a way better game!" or crap like that. It's bogus and you know it. There's plenty of information and things we can take from other competitive fighting games. More importantly, when a similar trend occurs here that is similar to those trends that have happened in the past, why wouldn't we examine and compare the two scenarios?

You should at least open yourself up to the possibility that Metaknight should be banned. If you're coming into the argument the same way a preacher comes in saying there shouldn't be kissing in church, do we really need to convince you?

I have, OS.

I came into the debate in the BBR with a neutral standpoint. What did I find? You running another political campaign about how MK needs to be banned. You throwing short stabs of "MK needs to die,". You pretty much being a jerk to everyone and pronouncing how someone is dumb for not seeing things in your perspective when the actuality is that there could be another perspective with equal substance.

When I came into the debate, you were not looking for a solution to the problem: your goal was to get Metaknight banned with any means possible. Everyone agreed when I made that statement.

You think I'm going into this thinking "I want Metaknight banned", but that is untrue. I want Metaknight to not be a problem. If he's banned, he's not a problem. If I found a way to beat him, I'd use it, but there is none. Never has been, nor will there be by any stretch of the imagination. All the data I have accumulated has shown the gap widening, not closing. It only gets worse.

I'm not "thinking"; I know you are. You've made up your mind about Metaknight a long time ago and you're simply doing everything you can think of to make it happen. Kudos for your dedication but your methods haven't been exactly "nice".

You haven't a found a way to beat him. Other players have. How can you suggest there is no way to beat him and there will never be a way when ADHD a year ago was placing Top 5 and now he's winning a national tournament? How can you say it's beyond imagination when it's reality that there are non-MK players consistently besting the top MK's.

However, you choose to ignore this reality and dig yourself deep with data and charts and graphs that make MK looks worse than he actually is. You make things more dramatic then they actually are, and your tactics aren't cool. Arguing with you is like arguing with Inui; you both make great points and can grab awesome stats, but your tunneled vision only allows you to concentrate on one thing. This is the main reason why I don't respond to your posts besides the fact that it's 10 pages long.

See. Look at this ****? I just spent a half hour typing this all out. Now you're telling me to deal with your rebuttal which is going to be 3x as long and then bash me when I won't feel like reupping the text count? Nah, man.

You're the one with something the prove. You post, give ideas, give arguments. I'll tell you what I think about it. You disagree or don't like my view on it? That's fine, but don't expect me to constantly repeat the same thing over and over for the sake of it. 'Cuz I just won't.

 

[Tien2500]

For that instance i was explaining it doesn't matter that it was a different game the point of it was that i picked up the best character in the game and i did amazing

that was the point i would say that for tekken 6/Guilty gear/TvC vs Capcom/whatever

Eh ok fine. Not worth discussing further.

But, this is exactly what we need. This would ultimately determine how much of an influence MK has on the scene. If we eliminate MK for the roster for a time and see what really happens, this would prove or disprove OS's idea that only those that do well against MK are those that place high.

If however those same characters time and time again where placing in the same spots like when MK was around, then it would prove that MK really has no effect on tournaments.

But if you take out a major element of the game it will take time to readjust. Three months I don't think is enough to judge what the post MK metagame would look like. Six months maybe but probably not.

 

[Spelt]

ADHD isn't 9 people.
-can do math-

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Would be cool but thats too crazy to do because all regions TO's would have to comply and all players and i already know for a fact it would start off as a negative impact because so many MK mains would be most likey quitting (at least NY/NJ would quit LOL)

too messy =S i still think the people who place high would continue to place high just without MK

And due to the reasons why we never do this, I expect the debate to rage on forever.

Those people would place high yes, but the thing to look at is which characters are placing high. It is theroized that if MK is removed, the tournaments would become more diverse. Currently, we are seeing MK act as a sort of filter. MK helps remove many characters from tournaments. So, those with even match-ups agaisnt MK won't be removed nearly as easily as those with poor match-ups against MK. Which leads to those haivng even match-ups against MK doing best.

Now, if we saw that MK was removed and those characters like Snake, Diddy, etc. weren't placing nearly as high as they once did and others took their place, this would really give pro-banners good evidence of the impact MK has the tournament. Right now, we are only doing guess work through observation.

 

[adumbrodeus]

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

No, I've been saying forever that tournament results in their current form don't measure character power in the metagame, because they don't take into account the size of the population in question, so it doesn't show a correlation between picking a character and winning.


They tell something else useful, current centralization.

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

Certain characters are better then others, better then random odds of winning a tournament =/= bannable.

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

With what evidence? If there were 50x the number of MKs entering pound 4 then any other character, even with totally random selection it would probabilistically produce similar results.


That's why we have statistics, to relate raw numbers to populations.

If I'm not mistaken an impressively balanced fighter game is what we're striving for. So why not remove the obvious hiccup in the balance?

Some people believe we are... but the fact is the only way to reach a truly balanced game is ban everyone except MK, or any other random character.

^^

Bottom line is, you can't make a criteria up to ban something post-operatively. That's why you always hear "That isn't ban-worthy!". Nothing is, unless you're following some ridiculous Sirlin line of logic that has applied to very few other parts of Brawl's ruleset.

What I've seen so far in this thread (in basic programming lingo!):

For pagenumber = 1 to infinity

Pro-Ban (OS mostly): Evidence of MK results constantly improving, evidence of those beating MK at the highest levels being outliers rather than the norm.

Anti-Ban (RDK mostly): Doesn't fit ban criteria, can't ban.

Pro-Ban: He fits my criteria (or we should ban him, and criteria to justify it for later use).

Anti-Ban: Nah.

Next pagenumber

Edit: Agree with swordgard about 40 posts/page being win. We're on page 51 now.

Wrong, anti-ban is saying, "we need to discuss a criteria and from there we can figure out if MK is banworthy".


Pro-ban has been either unable or unwilling to commit to a long term discuss of the relevant topic.


Even if we're basing it on MK we still need to start by discussing what our criteria is, that is the first step because without a criteria coming to a resolution is impossible.

 

[Tien2500]

Does anyone have access to anything like Ankoku's thread for SF4? Just curious is all.

 

[Allied]

There's no way the majority of MKs would quit.
they'd just pick up snake/diddy.

Do you actually know these people or have talked to actual MK mains who have mained him before a tier list has come out

Them along with me because it would just ruin the game for me (i beat MKs way more than i beat other character every time i lose in tournament its usually not a MK main unless its a Top MK main i usually Pee on most)

Spelt how about i ban your character you just spend 2+ years learning all the MU's with and stage decisions and whatever its not as simple as "Oh just relearn a different character"

This late in the game i realized i can't just relearn a different character i've spent TOO much time and kirby and now snake you ban either of them I'll just quit same for Mk mains and people who use them

 

[MKOwnage]

OS. We've addressed this in the backroom. Don't act like this is new news.

I'm not responding to excessively large points. I'll be happy to address each point individually, but you don't want to present your argument in that manner. Therefore it doesn't get addressed.

But since you've made a decently sized post I'll be happy to respond:



Addressed in the Backroom. I told you that I do not like going back and forth so my initial post was to be taken as just my view point. I'm also very up to date; just because I don't absorb myself constantly in this thread doesn't mean I'm not reading it. I'm not going to post everytime I see a point that I disagree with because I see too many of them.

After a few dozen pages of seeing the same thing it gets really tedious answering the same questions again.



By cherry picking, you mean Omni looking over the past month tournament results i.e. recent tournament results that accurately reflect how our current metagame is shaping...

...as opposed to showing charts and graphs that have data that reflects a metagame over a 2 year time span that loses the weight it holds because it does not take into consideration how much growth has been shown over said years.



We have a grand total of 0, count 'it, 0 players beating the top Jigglypuff player consistently. Is that how we're doing this?

We have a grand total of 1, count it, 1 Metaknight with a winning record against ADHD.

What's your point, Overswarm?
9 Top MK players.
6 NON-MK players beat them consistently.
3 of the 9 Top MK players are not beaten consistently.

I'm not surprised by this statistic nor do I see it as "evidence" that proclaims MK needs to be banned. MK is consistently losing to certain non-MK players; you like to call them outliers, I call them players who spent the most time on their character and on the game. Regardless, the absolute fact is that Metaknight is losing consistently at high/mid levels of play. It just may not be happening as often as you like.




I banned myself because I had a ****load of school work to do, and I was constantly getting IM's and PM's in my inbox about how you created a thread and how unfair of an approach you took and how someone needs to make a new thread up and etc.

However, I am not obligated to go through your extremely long posts and put up with a tit-for-tat line-by-line analysis with you. Been there; done that. It only leads to MK not being banned and the same will happen this time.

And yes, you are leading the "charge" as far as data is concerned. Your point? Your data has different interpretations; your interpretation of the data you have presented is not the absolute interpretation. With that said, this same argument has been addressed by several players in this thread about how data is just that... data.

I hate to break this to you, OS, but "data" is not what's going to ban MK. The data coupled with your interpretation is YOUR reasoning on why YOU believe MK should be banned, but the same does not hold true for everyone else.



Why are you deliberately dumbing down my arguments?

I have used Street Fighter as well as other successful competitive fighting games as a comparative icon in terms of finding the relationship between certain metagames. It would be ignorant to ignore the fighting game community and only focus on Brawl when there is plenty of viable information out there that can help determine how to approach Metaknight. The fact that you keep your eyes focused ONLY on Brawl makes me think you're not looking outside the box of what an actual competitive fighting game is and how issues like these have been addressed in a very similar fashion in very similar communities.

The Street Fighter results, that you continue to brush off, shows a metagame that is currently similar to Brawl's metagame in terms of character dominance... except the character dominance is more. Yet when I bring in these interesting facts and results from other fighting game communities that are successful, I get:

"Brawl isn't SF!" or "Brawl is a way better game!" or crap like that. It's bogus and you know it. There's plenty of information and things we can take from other competitive fighting games. More importantly, when a similar trend occurs here that is similar to those trends that have happened in the past, why wouldn't we examine and compare the two scenarios?



I have, OS.

I came into the debate in the BBR with a neutral standpoint. What did I find? You running another political campaign about how MK needs to be banned. You throwing short stabs of "MK needs to die,". You pretty much being a jerk to everyone and pronouncing how someone is dumb for not seeing things in your perspective when the actuality is that there could be another perspective with equal substance.

When I came into the debate, you were not looking for a solution to the problem: your goal was to get Metaknight banned with any means possible. Everyone agreed when I made that statement.



I'm not "thinking"; I know you are. You've made up your mind about Metaknight a long time ago and you're simply doing everything you can think of to make it happen. Kudos for your dedication but your methods haven't been exactly "nice".

You haven't a found a way to beat him. Other players have. How can you suggest there is no way to beat him and there will never be a way when ADHD a year ago was placing Top 5 and now he's winning a national tournament? How can you say it's beyond imagination when it's reality that there are non-MK players consistently besting the top MK's.

However, you choose to ignore this reality and dig yourself deep with data and charts and graphs that make MK looks worse than he actually is. You make things more dramatic then they actually are, and your tactics aren't cool. Arguing with you is like arguing with Inui; you both make great points and can grab awesome stats, but your tunneled vision only allows you to concentrate on one thing. This is the main reason why I don't respond to your posts besides the fact that it's 10 pages long.

See. Look at this ****? I just spent a half hour typing this all out. Now you're telling me to deal with your rebuttal which is going to be 3x as long and then bash me when I won't feel like reupping the text count? Nah, man.

You're the one with something the prove. You post, give ideas, give arguments. I'll tell you what I think about it. You disagree or don't like my view on it? That's fine, but don't expect me to constantly repeat the same thing over and over for the sake of it. 'Cuz I just won't.

Holy crap omni.

It would be hard to really generate enough data in that period of time. 3 months is definitely too short but even 6 months is less than ideal.

Even in that period we would be seeing Diddy or Snake or dominating.

 

[Kewkky]

Allied, why are you baiting attacks? And why are you laughing and demeaning people for falling into your baits? ou're taunting OS by calling him "general of the charge" and whatnot, then when he simply says "you are high sir" you keep pushing it farther and farther while acting innocent.

That's not really cool, you know.

 

[Spelt]

the amount of MK mains that mained him before the tier list came out is minuscule at best.
not even M2K would be in that list.

 

[Allied]

And due to the reasons why we never do this, I expect the debate to rage on forever.

Those people would place high yes, but the thing to look at is which characters are placing high. It is theroized that if MK is removed, the tournaments would become more diverse. Currently, we are seeing MK act as a sort of filter. MK helps remove many characters from tournaments. So, those with even match-ups agaisnt MK won't be removed nearly as easily as those with poor match-ups against MK. Which leads to those haivng even match-ups against MK doing best.

Now, if we saw that MK was removed and those characters like Snake, Diddy, etc. weren't placing nearly as high as they once did and others took their place, this would really give pro-banners good evidence of the impact MK has the tournament. Right now, we are only doing guess work through observation.

There have been To's that have banned MK check out the hobo tournaments and you can do some observation there when xyro banned MK it was actually pretty cool but the same players still placed the same really the MK mains were hurt the most though because... there MK mains lol

i agree what you are saying though maybe tournament results could be more diverse but in reality who knows

Does anyone have access to anything like Ankoku's thread for SF4? Just curious is all.

he has that, sick

Allied, why are you baiting attacks? And why are you laughing and demeaning people for falling into your baits? ou're taunting OS by calling him "general of the charge" and whatnot, then when he simply says "you are high sir" you keep pushing it farther and farther while acting innocent.

That's not really cool, you know.

Me baiting attacks, Hes making himself seem like a general i simply was sarcastically like "Oh yeah hes leading the army" because overswarm simply takes this too seriously to the point of insulting and demeaning people

and he didn't simply say you are high sir he completely ignored my opinion and supplied a insult instead not that i care

i troll this thread usually because once again you guys are debating on a Video Game Forum

it shouldn't be taken this seriously and the debating shouldn't be so serious it would cause a flame war if anything i did the smart thing and i didn't stoop down to a flame war against overswarm because i guarentee you if i met overswarm at a tournament he would be awesome (/dats dat meatriding)

 

[Omni]

eh don't say that allied

it may not be serious to you, but it may be serious for other people.

try not to apply your perspective of what is to how other people may perceive it.

just sayin', friend.

 

[Kewkky]

Me baiting attacks, Hes making himself seem like a general i simply was sarcastically like "Oh yeah hes leading the army" because overswarm simply takes this too seriously to the point of insulting and demeaning people

My point exactly. You should know that people won't take jokes seriously in the internet, and that sarcasm isn't obvious through the internet. Everyone's all serious and a small sarcastic line can seem like a demeaning tone (which it is).

i troll this thread usually because once again you guys are debating on a Video Game Forum

Humm... That makes flame-baiting all right? >___>

Like all people are saying: if you have something to say, then say it. But if you have nothing to say, don't say anything at all.

 

[Tien2500]

And due to the reasons why we never do this, I expect the debate to rage on forever.

Those people would place high yes, but the thing to look at is which characters are placing high. It is theroized that if MK is removed, the tournaments would become more diverse. Currently, we are seeing MK act as a sort of filter. MK helps remove many characters from tournaments. So, those with even match-ups agaisnt MK won't be removed nearly as easily as those with poor match-ups against MK. Which leads to those haivng even match-ups against MK doing best.

Now, if we saw that MK was removed and those characters like Snake, Diddy, etc. weren't placing nearly as high as they once did and others took their place, this would really give pro-banners good evidence of the impact MK has the tournament. Right now, we are only doing guess work through observation.

Honestly this debate will never be solved by evidence. We can't use any sort of evidence because there is no criteria. Ultimately what matters most is that people find the game enjoyable. People could spout out all the Sirlin they want but the bottom is *most* people aren't playing for money or anything. If they were they could devote their time and energy into better money making endeavors. The return of investment on Smash Bros is very low unless you're at the absolute top of the mountain. Even then there are better ways to make a buck. If people didn't find Smash a particularly agreeable way to maybe make money they wouldn't do it.

If MK does make the game so unenjoyable that people aren't having fun then you'll see attendance decline and an MK ban will be more seriously considered. The only real criteria there is for a character ban is "the character is detrimental to the game to the point where people don't want to play anymore".

It all comes down to what this particular community will tolerate.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

@Tien: Yeah, and that is what I will expect to be the real determinate to a widely used ban or not.

There have been To's that have banned MK check out the hobo tournaments and you can do some observation there when xyro banned MK it was actually pretty cool but the same players still placed the same really the MK mains were hurt the most though because... there MK mains lol

Well, you know that isn't good enough. People could easily come up with the notion that that particular tournament was an outlier to the theory. The MKs their aren't as skilled as the other players that main differently, etc.

Do you happen to have a real quick refernce to those hobo tournaments?

 

[Allied]

eh don't say that allied

it may not be serious to you, but it may be serious for other people.

try not to apply your perspective of what is to how other people may perceive it.

just sayin', friend.

[/B]
My point exactly. You should know that people won't take jokes seriously in the internet, and that sarcasm isn't obvious through the internet. Everyone's all serious and a small sarcastic line can seem like a demeaning tone (which it is).


Humm... That makes flame-baiting all right? >___>

Like all people are saying: if you have something to say, then say it. But if you have nothing to say, don't say anything at all.

Alright fine my apologises overswarm i didn't mean it in that way to insult you, my bad

It gets way too serious in here for a discussion about MK


@ xeylode

Nope sorry brah @_@