Justblaze647
Smash Lord
I think you may have misread something somewhere. Maybe YOU should get it right
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Official Metaknight Discussion
- Thread starter Hylian
- Start date
- Status
MarKO X
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2008
- Messages
- 2,542
- Location
- Brooklyn
- NNID
- legendnumberM
- 3DS FC
- 2595-2072-2390
- Switch FC
- 531664639998
well yeah.
i figured that fully explaining everything would be the solution to such a question. it's not like you gave him a "fill in the bubbles with a no.2 pencil" sheet.
Budget Player Cadet_
Smash Hero
Umm... no, see, we have come up with all manner of proof while you guys are just sitting there saying "It's not good enough".
He's bannable because despite him being the number 1 threat for over a year and a half no other character breaks even against him.
Anti-ban people, reluctant or otherwise, stated over and over again that it was a matter of time before a character was developed enough to go at least even with MK.
It hasn't happened.
No fighting game has legitimate characters that don't have a 5 or smaller on their matchup chart, and for good reason. You destroy the purpose of competition when you pick MK.
Anti-ban people, reluctant or otherwise, stated over and over again that it was a matter of time before a character was developed enough to go at least even with MK.
It hasn't happened.
No fighting game has legitimate characters that don't have a 5 or smaller on their matchup chart, and for good reason. You destroy the purpose of competition when you pick MK.
¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯
Smash Legend
Where are you getting this from?
Yet.
What's the purpose of competition? I always thought it was to win, and in that case MK is perfect for competition.
Alphatron
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,269
I'm not sure most smash players even believe this themselves. Melee is being dominated by people who know how to overcome Jigglypuff's bad matchups...and now people are calling for her placement into top tier! This contradicts everything!
Is Jigglypuff top tier or is she just being used by good players who know the game well?
The act of pitting two or more variables together or separately, one of them emerging the victor and claiming some resource. Pretty vague, but you get the idea.
When everyone uses MK? Well, the competition stops being "two or more variables" and becomes "two cases of the same variable"... I wouldn't like the Olympics if it was just one guy and his clones competing. Mating season would be weirder and more random for animals if they had to fight against themselves to see who gets the females.
The metagame effectively changes from "the most skilled opponent wins" into "the most skilled MK mainer wins". It's not what's happening now, but it's what a couple of people are telling pro-ban to do: main MK and prove he's broken... not much fun in a game like that.
Overswarm
is laughing at you
- Joined
- May 4, 2005
- Messages
- 21,181
Sorry, no kid-sized chunks. I'm giving you my whole answer, otherwise you're just going to quote and say "what about X" and then I have to fill you in anyway.
-----
As with most "grey" areas, I consider it a variable based on the game at hand. One game can have one criteria and another game can have another.
When looking at a game, you determine it is competitive primarily though these ways:
-variables in play
(i.e., not a "beaten" game within the realm of human activity, like tic tac toe)
-possibilities for consistent victors based on specific actions and thought processes
-possibilities for consistent losers based on specific actions and thought processes
(this is different than the above; a consistent victor but seemingly random losers below him generally cannot be considered competitive due to the "breakaway" factor, since if the losers are random in nature but the victor is not at a competent level of play, you can generally assume that the game is "finished" before it is actually done, which doesn't make for a good competitive game)
-an audience
(a game with 10 people can be competitive. A game with no players cannot. Simple as that.)
Pretty simple, no? But a lot of BAD games can be competitive with the above criteria.
For a GOOD competitive game, one that is ultimately going to be healthy, enjoyed, and accepted by a wider range of players you see the above and the following:
No optimum strategy
This doesn't necessarily mean that everyone doesn't take similar actions. Halo 1 was competitive with the pistol being the overall weapon of choice, but getting three shot kills with the pistol wasn't the optimum strategy. It was too inconsistent, and so people made up for it first by using overshield and camo and powerweapons like sniper and RLs, and as the game matured people used teamwork to get around this base weapon. While the game had a central axis, the use of strategies on said axis were numerous in nature and individual playstyle could foster
You can really see this in games like Starcraft; there is no "optimum strategy". It's cyclical in nature.
High skill cap
In other words, you need to practice. You can't come in and just wreck people naturally. While some people cry foul with Brawl, Brawl fits this criteria quite nicely.
The game is fun
How can we forget?! If people don't think it's fun, it can't be a healthy competitive game. It has to appeal to a broad audience. At ALL levels of play. This is why games like Street Fighter have such small numbers in comparison to smash; Smash is fun for little kids playing with items just the same as it is fun for grown men to be playing with items. We can wean ourselves towards a game that fits the above criteria more strictly to create a finer tuned game.
The game is fun to watch
This one is tough, but if it isn't fun to watch it leads to a less competitive game. This doens't mean laymans watching, this means players of the game watching.
So looking at the above and knowing what a competitive game is, one part of my criteria is any character that breaks the aforementioned requirements for a competitive game should be banned.
So if a character is too easy to win with? Yes, ban him. This doesn't mean easy to use, this means easy to win with. If we add two hypothetical characters into the game, GUY A and GUY B, and GUY B can beat the entire cast by spamming forward smash incredibly consistently to the point that just about everyone plays GUY B to win, but then we find out that GUY A can beat GUY B by timing his f-tilt within a few frames but only one or two people out there can do it, I'd still ban GUY B because it saves the game. This is an obviously exaggerated example and it is never this clear, but the principle is the same.
Looking in Brawl we have an extraordinary amount of evidence showing that counterpicks are indeed an incredibly important part of the game. Outliers such as Ally and ADHD are losing to Ice Climbers, Dededes, Marths, and other matchups with non-outlier players from time to time, yet we don't see these isolated incidences with the Metaknight outliers. This is curious, and looking at trends in the lower level of play we do indeed see that these bad matchups are common and, generally, are what actually take out top players!
Metaknight is an exception to this.
The thing about Smash is that it revolves around counterpicking. We've made it this way by not using "all stages random" as our base to make it more competitive. Because of inherent imbalances and the admitting that there IS no "fair ground" in this game, we've come at the problem in such a way that it brings about the most fair collection of games.
As stated earlier, Metaknight is an exception to this.
Because of this, Metaknight has become a huge issue in tournament. He can be mained solo and never get "bracket gayed". You saw DEHF lose to a kirby and an IC, and both are bad matchups. You see Lain's ICs losing to two MKs. You see all these top players losing to characters on a consistent basis.... but not MK. This give MK an added advantage.
When a character breaks one of the fundamental aspects of the game, he should be looked at closely for a ban
Whether or not he breaks a fundamental aspect is generally subjective, and the effect definitely is. Metaknight does break a few fundamental aspects (recovery, edge play, IDC, counterpick system) but IDC can be banned globally and fairly, recovery isn't huge. Edge playi s a big deal to a lot of people (planking, scrooging), and the counterpick system has shown to be huge.
In short, Metaknight exists outside of Brawl's normal gameplay.
It's similar to if we found a character that could cancel all vertical momentum so they could always stop from dying off the top, or a character that could stop horizontal movement so they could always DI down. This doesn't necessarily remove them from normal gameplay, but it DOES lead them into question. Same with master hand; he just doesn't fit in the game because he can't lose a stock, so you have to ask "should he be here?" and look at it
Another big thing in competition is dominance.
Dominance simply means that something is a significant step higher than the rest in terms of competition, and it doesn't have to have a reason why.
When something is dominant in a competitive game for an unusual amount of time, it needs to be looked at for a ban
This is everything. Stages, characters, what have you. If you see a large number of characters always picking a stage, you ahve to ask yourself "should this exist?". If you see one character always picking one stage 100% of the time, you have to ask the same question. If you see a large majority of people all picking the same character, you have to ask the question.
Undisputed dominance in conjunction with other criteria can lead to a ban. Undisputed dominance means there is literally no statistical hope for a changing of the guard. This piece in your game is the best, gives you the best chance of winning, and not picking it is anti-competitive in nature, thus inevitably swirling the game down the toilet.
Using Risk as an example, if you found the person controlling North America was the victor an incredibly high percentage of the time, you'd question it. If you then looked closer and then found that, while other countries won from time to time, it seemed this only occured from some of the world's best Risk players and there were no countries that seemed to be consistently winning (not counting NA), you can deem North America to be an obvious optimum strategy that takes the gameplay and changes the rules to say "be a good enough player to beat the guy with north america, or be north america"; this can change the game in incredibly negative ways, and must be examined carefully.
I could go on longer, but this is a good start; most of my posts have covered the majority of what I've said.
... That is still a loaded question. RDK is better at this than you. Go respond to my 9 or 10 posts plz.
Tournament results?
Clearly a year and a half isn't enough.
The purpose of competition, succinctly, is to give both parties the tools to take on each other and see who's the most skilled. Skill can be and is overriden by poor character choice, inexperience and other harder to define factors. When you pick MK, the only choice you have to create a true test of skill if both players know all the matchups is to pick MK too.
Is MK unbeatable? No. Do all MK players know all the matchups? No. Are all MK players equally skilled? Definitely not. Is there a reason to not main MK?
No.
Who's competing? The players or the characters?
We do not ban things to make matchups "less gay". I've pounded this into people's heads since the D3 debacle, and some of you still don't get it.
I fail to see how this in any way invalidates the idea that you should probably get better.
¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯
Smash Legend
So basically you're taking tournament results and making up bull**** ratios based on them. Sounds legit to me.
There's no set amount of time that's required for a ban to be put into place. Let the issue play itself out. People are starting to be able to beat MK, let's see how it goes from here.
No, that's balanced competition. If you want that, don't play Brawl.
Yes, as is true with every single character. If I pick Ganon, the only way for you to truly prove you're better than me is if you choose Ganon. So what's your point?
Maybe to you, but what about the thousands of people who don't use MK? I'm sure they have a reason for doing so.
I have a friend who doesn't play smash and I'm trying to explain MK is broken to him to the best of my abilities.
It was working until I told him MK hasn't gotten first in a national tournament in 9 months....
Get better.
It was working until I told him MK hasn't gotten first in a national tournament in 9 months....
Fix'd for accuracy.
Get better.
Turbo Ether
Smash Master
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,601
How many nationals have there been in the last 9 months? And does Evo not count?
Overswarm
is laughing at you
- Joined
- May 4, 2005
- Messages
- 21,181
Your post is surprisingly limited, Vrael.
Arguing in such a way so as to promote an inferior balancing of a game can't lead to a good result; if someone says "this leads to a poor competitive game" and you say "yeah, so what, play another game", you can't possibly come to an agreement.
edit;
Omni JUST posted the nationals from the past year (hwat he defines as nationals). 2 MKs, 2 Snakes, 2 Diddys for victories. That's just counting 1st place.
I took note of how many Snakes, Diddys, and MKs were in my "giant post".
Arguing in such a way so as to promote an inferior balancing of a game can't lead to a good result; if someone says "this leads to a poor competitive game" and you say "yeah, so what, play another game", you can't possibly come to an agreement.
edit;
Omni JUST posted the nationals from the past year (hwat he defines as nationals). 2 MKs, 2 Snakes, 2 Diddys for victories. That's just counting 1st place.
I took note of how many Snakes, Diddys, and MKs were in my "giant post".
Vrael, you are truly terrible at this. You have no idea what competition is and you show it. People don't play a game competitively if there is a clear line between winning and losing. Nobody who wants to win money will bet on a horse that limps.
a) They think their character can go even
b) Their only goal is to be the best with their character, they don't care about being the best
c) They don't really care about prize money
I know you'd fit in c) for sure.
I'm not making any ratios up and if I did I don't see how they would be bull****. Real experience counts more than anything, any competitive player will tell you that.
That's exactly what anti-ban, myself included, said last time and yet here we are. It's not really true either.
You don't know what competition is.
This is the dumbest part of your post. You had the tools to pick the best character, yet you chose the worst. The tools were available to you, you just chose not to use them. The other player doesn't have to risk losing because you were dumb.
There are several reasons:
a) They think their character can go even
b) Their only goal is to be the best with their character, they don't care about being the best
c) They don't really care about prize money
I know you'd fit in c) for sure.
ADHD
Smash Hero
Lol at people talking about natural talent and the theories of top players. This is a video game.
Alphatron
Smash Champion
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,269
It doesn't invalidate the idea that you should get better at all. You should always aim to get better. When people honestly argue about tiers not existing, they aren't calling the game 100% balanced. They're saying that the tier list, made by the people who've studied up on the game and have put many hours into learning it, is flat out wrong. The arguement for this is that X character would be higher if X player knew how to use them. And this arguement is always countered by logic, numbers, and facts on the character and their matchup. The ones arguing against the tier list are made to look like fools.
Then some melee players learn how to use Jigglypuff, and despite her current position on said tier list, people are seriously saying that she should be top? Doesn't this kind of prove the anti tiers point? Tiers don exits because nobody truly knows all the ins and outs of the game. Things change, depsite all the "knowledge" presented on the matter. Jiggs and Falcon were lower than Zelda on one of the earliest melee tier list.
If Ally and ADHD stopped using Snake and Diddy and picked up Dedede instead, do you think that Snake and Diddy would maintain their tier positions? Or would people start arguing otherwise? That's what confuses me.
Palpi
Smash Hero
One that you have invested more time than almost anyone into =]
Turbo Ether
Smash Master
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,601
Why are you better than 99% of the Smash community at Brawl?
Justblaze647
Smash Lord
ADHD, video games aren't for simple-minded people all the time. It actually requires certain skills to triumph in competitive scenes. Some people have better skills than others, be it because they were born better biologically, or because they've been practicing for a longer period of time than the newcomers. I personally consider it a mental sport, as do many people. Would you argue against me saying that Brawl is somehow related to Chess? I personally see lots of dependence on baiting and punishing, much like chess does (out-thinking opponents, making them do mistakes and take their pieces because they 'fell for it').
Nanaki
Smash Lord
This made me lol.
I'm quoting this because I <3 Trela. I want to see this post!
I haven't seen a legitimately good rebuttal to this yet.
Weren't we talking about Wario and Olimar being possible MK counters the last time this issue came around?
I wonder why determined people fail out of school?
Natural talent exists in everything. You obviously have good smash instincts. Do you really think you could take some shmoe off the street and make him as good as you?
UltiMario
Out of Obscurity
You know, I add two and two and can get fish out of, not because I'm stupid, but because I'm creative.
To me it looks like OS is just supporting more Meta Knight players to spawn to the point where it DOES become a problem. I'm not sure hes being serious when he says "Nobody should be using anyone but Meta Knight [because he is so good]" (I don't think hes ever directly said that, but thats what I infer from a lot of what he says), but it seems that way to me.
All OS is doing is pushing this so-called "problem" to the extreme and even INFLUENCING it to become worse.
Meta Knight ban = Global Warming.
You be trollin', I be hatin'.
To me it looks like OS is just supporting more Meta Knight players to spawn to the point where it DOES become a problem. I'm not sure hes being serious when he says "Nobody should be using anyone but Meta Knight [because he is so good]" (I don't think hes ever directly said that, but thats what I infer from a lot of what he says), but it seems that way to me.
All OS is doing is pushing this so-called "problem" to the extreme and even INFLUENCING it to become worse.
Meta Knight ban = Global Warming.
You be trollin', I be hatin'.
Overswarm
is laughing at you
- Joined
- May 4, 2005
- Messages
- 21,181
"There are many non-Metaknight mains including Ally who have trained their characters
to be more than a force to reckon with such as Anther’s Pikachu, Fiction’s Wario, DEHF
and SK92’s Falco, mikeHAZE and NEO’s Marth, Razer’s Snake, Atomsk’s DDD, Lain
and Meep’s Ice Climbers, and ADHD and Ninjalink’s Diddy just to name a few. If you
compare the top Metaknight player’s such as Mew2King, Tyrant, and Dojo they only
make up a small fraction of a large talented whole."
Closest thing in the official anti-ban statement.
http://lueshi.info/upload/images/metaknight.pdf
Also, good reads:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=5917017#post5917017
and
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=244473
demonictoonlink
Smash Master
Wall of texts are odd. This topic isn't straightforward, but I've read many of those long *** write ups and realized most of them could be a paragraph.
Flame this.
Flame this.
demonictoonlink
Smash Master
^^^
LOL!!!
That's pretty much how the SBR ended it :/
LOL!!!
That's pretty much how the SBR ended it :/
Atomsk_92
Smash Hero
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2006
- Messages
- 6,362
Turbo Ether
Smash Master
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,601
Atomsk failed >_>
Overswarm
is laughing at you
- Joined
- May 4, 2005
- Messages
- 21,181
You're making the mistake of assuming the person in the chair will save you, when in fact you might need to be looking elsewhere.How this debate will end:
Turbo Ether
Smash Master
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,601
They're all in chairs >_>'
Overswarm
is laughing at you
- Joined
- May 4, 2005
- Messages
- 21,181
quiet, you
way to be the guy who hears a joke, everyone laughs, and then you ruin it with your follow up
- Status