Official Metaknight Discussion

[fkacyan]

If this were the case, it would be pretty obvious.

Even if it were obvious, what could you do at that point? You can't force people to attend tourneys, and if people got used to and liked MK not being in the game even if it made it worse and didn't want him back, there would be little TOs could do, besides offering incentives for not using MK or restricting what he can do ala HOBO's CP rules, but that just sends the wrong message.

I don't necessarily think a temp ban is a bad idea, if just to show people that MK isn't nearly as broken as people think, but it has to be approached extremely carefully.

 

[phi1ny3]

I agree, it has to be done really accurately, there's a lot of holes that could be exposed unless done right.

 

[etecoon]

temp ban would be funny because AN would just ignore it and that's where so many of the best MK's are anyway, the data would be extremely inconclusive

 

[fkacyan]

temp ban would be funny because AN would just ignore it and that's where so many of the best MK's are anyway, the data would be extremely inconclusive

AN wouldn't ignore it if you could show us we could make significant amounts of money a MK ban tourneys without doing a lot of expensive traveling.

 

[iRJi]

I don't necessarily think a temp ban is a bad idea, if just to show people that MK isn't nearly as broken as people think, but it has to be approached extremely carefully.

That's... Kind of one sided on thinking xD. I guess you are assuming that if this was done you think that people were over exaggerating about metaknight. What if we find out that Mk is infact as broken as people speculated it to be?

Anyway, enough dodging this. Like I said, the only way to get proper results is actions. We need a logical plan to go about this for people who are agreeing? with it? Well lets hear ideas now.

My suggestion is to split the game into a year format. For 6 months we temp ban metaknight, and for the last 6 months we allow him in tourneys. I would actually like to have a major tourney in both scenarios if possible to get a major pool of results from everyone in one place. This of course is a result of where tourneys fall on date.

Each month we make a log on results from tourneys that have a 24 man count or more for character usage, overall attendance, character development and player reactions in terms of how he feels at the state where he/she is in about how the meta game is. By doing this, we can take note on how all of these variables change over time, and can determine if it was a benefit or not. We do this for both sides of the spectrum (for the 6 month ban, and 6 month not ban) And after it is all finished, we can compare both side of notes and come to a logical conclusion on what to do.

Any thoughts?

 

[Overswarm]

We already have the 6 months with MK, so we'd only need 6 months with him.


If we can get a few nationals to ban him, regionals wouldn't be too hard. I've talked to the TOs of the 8 nationals and over half of them would be willing to ban MK if it was the BBR decision to do so. If this was merely a public endeavor, I'm unsure of how many would be willing to do so.

The regionals wouldn't be hard to get at all. Most people are kinda sick of MK and would still go to tournaments; the only issue is for MK dominated areas. I know the majority, if not all, of the MW TOs would be willing to ban MK for a short period of time.

 

[iRJi]

We already have the 6 months with MK, so we'd only need 6 months with him.


If we can get a few nationals to ban him, regionals wouldn't be too hard. I've talked to the TOs of the 8 nationals and over half of them would be willing to ban MK if it was the BBR decision to do so. If this was merely a public endeavor, I'm unsure of how many would be willing to do so.

The regionals wouldn't be hard to get at all. Most people are kinda sick of MK and would still go to tournaments; the only issue is for MK dominated areas. I know the majority, if not all, of the MW TOs would be willing to ban MK for a short period of time.

Agreed. I talk about difficulty mainly because I live in NJ, and everyone knows how MK populated it is in this area. But yes, the bigger tourneys we can get into the testing, the better results we can come up with.

 

[e__]

Why not just do a simple rotation? One tournament with MK banned, one without, or even a ratio like 1:3 or 1:4. We have plenty of tournaments.

 

[Overswarm]

Agreed. I talk about difficulty mainly because I live in NJ, and everyone knows how MK populated it is in this area. But yes, the bigger tourneys we can get into the testing, the better results we can come up with.

Find a TO willing to host MK banned tournaments, even if they're small house tournaments. If you build it, they will come.

Why not just do a simple rotation? One tournament with MK banned, one without, or even a ratio like 1:3 or 1:4. We have plenty of tournaments.

This would result in all MK mains half-assing secondaries or not attending every other week, and would give little to no clear data.

 

[Tien2500]

What if we staggered the months? Like instead of having 6 months straight of no MK you designated 6 calendar months (March, May, July, and so on) as MK free months. This will ease the pain for MK mains who will only have to wait at most a month between tournaments and will prevent people from getting too used to an MK free metagame if the decision is made to go back.

Or you could designate a certain number of MK free tournaments instead of a global temp ban.

I don't know exactly the best way to do this but think outside the box. It doesn't have to be a straight up 6 month ban. Other methods may be easier to swallow.

 

[iRJi]

Why not just do a simple rotation? One tournament with MK banned, one without, or even a ratio like 1:3 or 1:4. We have plenty of tournaments.

Because attendance wise it can throw it off. I posted it earlier, but I can recap on it lightly. When you do things by partial usage, people can simply wait out the time period until the next available time where they can use the character comes around. The reason why I also like 6 months of testing, is because it is simply too long to just "wait out until it's over"

What if we staggered the months? Like instead of having 6 months straight of no MK you designated 6 calendar months (March, May, July, and so on) as MK free months. This will ease the pain for MK mains who will only have to wait at most a month between tournaments and will prevent people from getting too used to an MK free metagame if the decision is made to go back.

Or you could designate a certain number of MK free tournaments instead of a global temp ban.

I don't know exactly the best way to do this but think outside the box. It doesn't have to be a straight up 6 month ban. Other methods may be easier to swallow.

Same thing applies to my post above. But also this is why we are talking about it now to come up with an reasonable plan. These are just thoughts of what we can do, and what we can gather from it.

 

[Overswarm]

If it isn't a straight 6 months, you're going to get a "waiting" period where MK mains and TOs just wait it out and straight up say "no".

 

[e__]

I see your points and agree, but isn't 6 straight a little extreme? What about 3 or 4?

 

[iRJi]

Find a TO willing to host MK banned tournaments, even if they're small house tournaments. If you build it, they will come.



This would result in all MK mains half-assing secondaries or not attending every other week, and would give little to no clear data.

Seems like a plan. let's of course keep going with options to see if any other logical ones come up first. If we had the support of the BBR, this would be a lot easier to manage xD.

 

[HeroMystic]

If there is going to be a MK ban it needs to be uninterrupted and generally consented by a super large majority of TOs to gain factual data. This is required.

That's all I want to say on that.

 

[etecoon]

I see your points and agree, but isn't 6 straight a little extreme? What about 3 or 4?

no, a temp ban definitely needs to be at least 6 months, I actually think even 6 months isn't enough time to make conclusions on but anything less than that is so far beyond insufficient that it would be pointless

 

[iRJi]

I see your points and agree, but isn't 6 straight a little extreme? What about 3 or 4?

Lack of tourneys, that's why.

I added it up on average, not including people attending or amount of tourneys thrown on the day of usage, Normal tourneys are held on Saturday. 4 Saturdays in a month. This means in 6 months we get about 24 tourneys for a single person to test. If we cut it by a month, you subtract 4 from the over all max of 24. So 3 months equal 12, and 4 equals 16. See the mathematical difference? xD.

 

[e__]

I'm not saying we draw conclusions from a single period of 3-4 months, but recurring periods.

 

[fkacyan]

What if we find out that Mk is infact as broken as people speculated it to be?

I doubt it for several reasons, but as I said, I'd rather people see it for themselves rather than me trying to beat it into people's skulls or something.

I'd also have to learn a new secondary to beat Falcos. That would be interesting enough in and of itself for me.

 

[iRJi]

I doubt it for several reasons, but as I said, I'd rather people see it for themselves rather than me trying to beat it into people's skulls or something.

I'd also have to learn a new secondary to beat Falcos. That would be interesting enough in and of itself for me.

Fair enough for me xP.

 

[Overswarm]

I doubt it for several reasons, but as I said, I'd rather people see it for themselves rather than me trying to beat it into people's skulls or something.

I'd also have to learn a new secondary to beat Falcos. That would be interesting enough in and of itself for me.

Kirby. I've heard G&W but don't believe it.

 

[fkacyan]

Kirby. I've heard G&W but don't believe it.

Kirby is definitely an option. GaW is a possibility, but I don't see how he can easily get around the lasers in the same way a character with good aerial mobility can. he does have the advantage in killing though; if Falco makes one bad boostsmash he eats one of GaW's, which is never a good thing. They hit like trucks.

 

[etecoon]

kirby doesn't really beat falco IMO either, at least not that badly where you should get off your main for him. pikachu or IC's maybe?

 

[Overswarm]

Kirby is definitely an option. GaW is a possibility, but I don't see how he can easily get around the lasers in the same way a character with good aerial mobility can. he does have the advantage in killing though; if Falco makes one bad boostsmash he eats one of GaW's, which is never a good thing. They hit like trucks.

It's not so much avoiding lasers as collecting them so you get an amazing safe punish move.

What's worse than running into a G&W f-smash out of phantasm? Running into a G&W bucket.

 

[fkacyan]

kirby doesn't really beat falco IMO either, at least not that badly where you should get off your main for him. pikachu or IC's maybe?

Rofl, my main is ZSS, who gets hard-countered by Falco, so I have to have a secondary for him. Kirby actually tears him one, especially if he gets the lasers from him. Bair also beats sideB, so it's pretty easy to keep his recovery options slim.

 

[Gnes]

Multiple chrs. jabs beat side B...

its in falcos favor...kirbys one move does not make falcos recovery options slim and kirby has no answer to falcos jab

 

[fkacyan]

Multiple chrs. jabs beat side B...

its in falcos favor...kirbys one move does not make falcos recovery options slim and kirby has no answer to falcos jab

There isn't a single character in the game that I can think of that has any answer to Falco's jab except move away from it, or bait it and hit it.

The idea behind fighting Falco is limiting his options as much as you possibly can, because he's actually a fairly limited character if you space yourself properly.

EDIT: Gah I derailed the thread by accident. If you want to discuss the finer points of Falco-slaying, feel free to PM me.

 

[Nefarious B]

Yeah ZS's jab beats phantasm, you can just hold it.

And Marth can DS falco out of his whirly jab

 

[Kewkky]

There will be the players that just like having one less hard matchup to deal with. They won't want Meta Knight back regardless if it made the metagame absolutely perfect or sent it into a death spiral.

That's why we don't cater to the majority of the public in SWF. Remember that we're a bunch of people, but not all of us are casual, low/mid/high/top-level, or knowledgeable about the game. We can try and persuade the SBR's decision, but in the end they should be the ones to change their own decision... If I told you that my opinion mattered more than yours, and more than the SBR-B's, would you believe me? What about if I say your opinion is worth more than mine, and more than the SBR-B's, or any other combination? Would it be believable?

I prefer it if the SBR-B (since we know a great majority of the best players are in there [emphasis of majority, I didn't say all the best players]) were the ones in charge of whether M would be better staying in the game, or out of the game, after the 6-month thrial period.

kirby doesn't really beat falco IMO either, at least not that badly where you should get off your main for him. pikachu or IC's maybe?

Hah, that goes to show you just how much you know about Kirby. Let me guess... "Kirby should be below TL"? I can tell you what Kirby has that TL doesn't have! A way to punish shields and attempts at powershields: a dependable grab. TL's situational and highly punishable, so smart shielding really makes his matches a lot tougher.

I can also see a statement of "Chudat, the best Kirby, barely beat DEHF, the best Falco"... I can tell you, as a fellow Kirby mainer, that Chudat depends on mindgames more than overall character ability, and if he would incorporate all that the Kirby Boards have found out that he doesn't use, he would be a much better player. No offense to Chu at all, but he didn't know that up-angled fsmash has a noticeably stronger knockback than normal angled... I can only speculate about all the other stuff we know that he doesn't. Imagine what would've happened if Chu DID know Kirby inside-out.

I wanna keep on writing stuff, but I'm not here to say anything besides "Kirby has an advantage (if not small, a clear advantage) on Falco when used at the highest levels". People might not agree with me... But it's the truth.


And I'm all for a temporary ban. 6 months sounds very good to me... But in my opinion, we should begin the 6 months during summer after a huge MK-Allowed national, then end it in winter after a big MK-Banned national. That should give people time to learn someone else, from here 'til summer there's a good amount of time for that.

I wanted to say something else, but I forgot. I hate it when that happens.

 

[etecoon]

Let me guess... "Kirby should be below TL"?

I don't really think TL is especially great either, just in my experience when I've used falco vs kirby players it didn't seem that bad, not as bad as pikachu or IC's at least. it has nothing to do with my evaluation of kirby as an overall character, brawl is a game of matchups and you can even have a bad matchup with a character that's worse than you...

 

[fkacyan]

Yeah ZS's jab beats phantasm, you can just hold it.

And Marth can DS falco out of his whirly jab

I hate to continue in this direction, but it must be done.

It's not so much beating the phantasm as where you can beat it.

 

[Kewkky]

I don't really think TL is especially great either, just in my experience when I've used falco vs kirby players it didn't seem that bad, not as bad as pikachu or IC's at least. it has nothing to do with my evaluation of kirby as an overall character, brawl is a game of matchups and you can even have a bad matchup with a character that's worse than you...

By the way, I know that my tone came off as condescending, but I had no intention of doing so. No offense meant.

While I play Falcos though, it's the other way around... I think to myself "how can people think this isn't an advantaged MU?", since half the things Falco does are punished by Kirby, and the other half trade hits with him. While Falco is offstage, well-positioning non-fastfalled dairs will put an end to him quickly, and with Kirby's slow spacey fall speed, we have room for error while Falco doesn't. We have 4 answers to lasers: duck, powershield, jump over, or (eventually) copy his power and spam back. Reflector for our lasers? Some smart shooting will take care of that. no reason why Kirby should shoot the laser when he can be hit back, plus just having the lasers and using them every once in a while will force Falco into using reflector at unappropriate times where Kirby (after the very low stun from reflected lasers) can just run in and punish with a quick ftilt, or even a grab (and the damage will start getting racked)... Even worse for Falco is Kirby's ability to actually edgeguard with lasers, and with multiple jumps a recovering Falco should depend only on mix-ups/mindgames to recover.

Blah blah blah, defending-Kirby-cuz-I'm-a-Kirby-mainer-who-types-a-lot-of-babble stuff.

 

[TaterSalad0811]

^^^^

Pointed at for truth

Also, I'm pretty sure his recovery has the same priority as Fox's meaning that Kirby can d-air through it until Falco is out of ledgegrab range. He's not too good at recovering when spit under a stage either.

 

[-Mars-]

Chu ****** DEHF's last stock in 10 seconds pretty much proves that this matchup is really difficult for Falco.

If people can't see that then they should kill themselves.

 

[iRJi]

Chu ****** DEHF's last stock in 10 seconds pretty much proves that this matchup is really difficult for Falco.

If people can't see that then they should kill themselves.

That doesn't really prove anything, actually. Kirby still has the advantage on falco for other reasons though.

Lol @ people getting off track. Does anyone have any other idea's, or is my proposal a solid choice?

 

[OverLade]

Chu ****** DEHF's last stock in 10 seconds pretty much proves that this matchup is really difficult for Falco.

If people can't see that then they should kill themselves.

People like you shouldn't be allowed in these kinds of threads.

DEHF airdodged and fell off the stage, and got staged spiked. He didn't get *****, he was ahead a whole stock.

So how does that prove ANYTHING about the matchup? All it proves is that if Falco gets offstage he potentially loses a stock (DEHF could've teched even then), but he was ****** Chu otherwise.

 

[Overswarm]

We need to know the data to look for over a 6 month period.


Ankoku's point chart would be worthwhile to compare, I'd think. What else?

DEHF airdodged and fell off the stage, and got staged spiked. He didn't get *****, he was ahead a whole stock.

So how does that prove ANYTHING about the matchup? All it proves is that if Falco gets offstage he potentially loses a stock (DEHF could've teched even then), but he was ****** Chu otherwise.

I personally think the repeated strategy of "laser to 200% and f-tilt" was the first clue it was a bad matchup

 

[iRJi]

We need to know the data to look for over a 6 month period.


Ankoku's point chart would be worthwhile to compare, I'd think. What else?

character usage, overall attendance, character development and player reactions in terms of how he feels at the state where he/she is in about how the meta game is

My listings. I feel it's self explanatory as to why these things need to be logged.

 

[Overswarm]

But how to log them?

 

[Turbo Ether]

Atlantic North wouldn't be apprehensive to a temporary MK-ban as a whole. It's mainly NJ. We have an abundance of vocal, opinionated MK players.

New England, MD/VA, NYC and NY State don't have many MK players at all, so you'd have a reasonable chance of convincing them to do MK-banned tournies.

It would be a good idea to just exclude NJ from the experiment, instead of trying to debate with us, since I seriously doubt NJ would cooperate.