Official Metaknight Discussion

[ADHD]

I basically just tl;dr'ed this whole thread because I didn't wanna get into yet.

Someone inform me of what we are doing so I can get on this ****.

We are attacking eachother with beautiful, long worded fortresses of text.

 

[Sorto]

I feel that scrooging, planking, and air camping are all forms of stalling. They work similarly to the jigglypuff rising pound and/or the peach bomber stalling tactics that were BANNED in melee. Stalling is defined as any action that deliberately avoids all conflict as to make the game unplayable. If you or you opponent can not be hit, or only be hit when you are not in range, the game becomes unplayable, since it is unwinnable.

1. Scrooging Ban- If a player goes under any specific stage twice, without being hit or dealing damage in between, that player is in violation of scrooging.
2. Ledge Grab rule- Allow only a certain amount of ledge grabs in a match. This idea has been around for a while.
3. Air camping- Placing a time limit on this would be ridiculous. It is more fair to allow TOs to make the ruling. The problem is, there are often not enough TOs. Perhaps have it advised that those who bring wii's to tournies, carry an sd card that have the hack for unlimited replays. If a dispute arises, have a TO come over to determine the resolve, based on the replay.

This is considered a competitive fighting game. Not a competitive stalling game.

People want MK banned, because of these tactics, but the truth is, once he is gone, other characters will still abuse these tactics.

 

[UltiMario]

1. Scrooging Ban- If a player goes under any specific stage twice within a 15 second timeframe of the previous scrooge, without being hit or dealing damage in between, that player is in violation of scrooging. If a scrooge was done in order to recover, it doesn't add to the "scrooge counter" .

Fix'd

Trust me, without this, some pretty stupid arguements can be formed, this would avoid them.

The second part is more my own opinion if anything, but if you compare this to things such as the Rising Pound in Melee, it is a necessity.

 

[Sorto]

Fix'd

Trust me, without this, some pretty stupid arguements can be formed, this would avoid them.

The second part is more my own opinion if anything, but if you compare this to things such as the Rising Pound in Melee, it is a necessity.

I like your revisions. But I really can not see the arguments? Explain em to me?

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

MK has flaws too. Watch ADHD verse any MK player, he capitalizes on MKs flaws, as well as the players. MKS flaws can be taken advantage of. IF you think MK is without flaws then you are sadly mistaken.

Ofcourse MK has flaws. He's the 5th (?) lightest character in the game and no projectile. Can you capitalize on such flaws consistently w/o taking two years of practice? Not quite...

 

[Sorto]

Ofcourse MK has flaws. He's the 5th (?) lightest character in the game and no projectile. Can you capitalize on such flaws consistently w/o taking two years of practice? Not quite...

Regarding capitalization of those flaws, it depends who you ask. And depends who you play as.
Add to that-
Bad air speed
Does little damage per hit
24th grab range (tied with ike)
Grab Releasable
Popular Move: Up-b, the shuttle loop, when missed put MK in a bad position (Other Missed B Moves put him into freefall, still not easily taken advanage of though)

 

[Zankoku]

Ofcourse MK has flaws. He's the 5th (?) lightest character in the game and no projectile. Can you capitalize on such flaws consistently w/o taking two years of practice? Not quite...

Can't become world champ in a day.

 

[N.A.G.A.C.E]

Regarding capitalization of those flaws, it depends who you ask. And depends who you play as.
Add to that-
Bad air speed
Does little damage per hit
28th worst grab range (tied with ike)
Grab Releasable
Popular Move: Up-b, the shuttle loop, when missed put MK in a bad position (Other Missed B Moves put him into freefall, still not easily taken advanage of though)

he does not have the 28th best grab range he has the 24th best tied with bowser, jiggs, ike, pit, sonic

olimar only counts as one person , here is the link http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Grab

 

[Sorto]

he does not have the 28th best grab range he has the 24th best tied with bowser, jiggs, ike, pit, sonic

olimar only counts as one person , here is the link http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Grab

Your correct. But it is still tied with IKE as I said. And most people consider IKE terrible at grabbing.

But I did change my earlier post. Did you read my ruleset ideas?

 

[Chuee]

Japan has a nice scrooging rule in place, sorta like the one sorto came up with.

 

[Sorto]

Japan has a nice scrooging rule in place, sorta like the one sorto came up with.

Really? Sounds cool. What is theres? I felt mines strict. But I feel it must be strict to deter even the chance of stalling.

 

[N.A.G.A.C.E]

Did you read my ruleset ideas?

No u will tell me about it later

 

[Chuee]

Really? Sounds cool. What is theres? I felt mines strict. But I feel it must be strict to deter even the chance of stalling.

=/ can't find the thread. Shmot made a thread about Japan's metagame since he went over there. One of the rules they had was that Pit and MK can't glide under the stage more than 2 times.

 

[UltiMario]

I like your revisions. But I really can not see the arguments? Explain em to me?

For the recovery one, as I said, the rising pound in Melee is a perfect example. This'll cutoff that arguement.

Also, trust me, there WILL be people that point out that without that 15 second part, they'd say "Well what if somehow the MK Scrooges and them him and the opponent do this impossible thing where neither of them gets hit for like a minute, and then MK Scrooges again, he'd be disqualified."

Stupider arguements have happened.

 

[Sorto]

For the recovery one, as I said, the rising pound in Melee is a perfect example. This'll cutoff that arguement.

Also, trust me, there WILL be people that point out that without that 15 second part, they'd say "Well what if somehow the MK Scrooges and them him and the opponent do this impossible thing where neither of them gets hit for like a minute, and then MK Scrooges again, he'd be disqualified."

Stupider arguements have happened.

1. The recovery thing is already covered. My rule says if he goes under twice its scrooging. You would never have to go under a stage twice to recover. Once is possible to be sneaky. But if you go back then its scrooging. Your no longer recovering. Now ur just edge traveling and wasting time.
2. If you attacked for even as long as 7 minutes and no one got hit how did the mk end up off the stage? Sure he could of jumped off or been sheild pushed off the edge. But jumping off why? Whose he chasing? Is he just stalling? Edge push sure possible. But why must he go under the stage afterwards.
The 15 seconds rule would allow him to go under then stage, then plank, then air camp, then go back under the stage. Plus enforcing a time is sorta hard I feel.
Edit: But perhaps you are right in that mine is a lil to open ended. It's just a starting point. I feel the recovery thing is not needed. But I suppose it really couldnt hurt. Recovery is only included if you actually got hit away rite? But the 15 seconds thing needs tweeking for sure. Its just way too abusable.

 

[Crow!]

I have a theoretical question to bring to this topic. Just trying to figure out the mindset of both sides of the argument. The two questions are completely different scenarios and aren't linked, just to avoid confusion.

To Anti-Ban: Lets say we as a Brawl community somehow got a time/space traveling machine. Using such a machine, we discovered that if MK was banned, Brawl tournaments six months after said ban had a 15% increase in turnout over the turnout of those exact same tournaments but with MK legal. Brawl's lifespan was also roughly nine months longer. With this knowledge, would you still want to keep MK legal?

To Pro-Ban: Lets say we as a Brawl community somehow got a time/space traveling machine. Using such a machine, we discovered that if MK was banned, Diddy Kong would basically took MK's place. With the MK MU out of the way, the Diddy Kong mains fully dived into their other MUs and discovered that unlike Snake, as long as the match ups were played just right, they were never at a disadvantage. They figured this out six months after MK was banned due to extensive testing. Marth was also discovered that, outside of Diddy Kong, to also have no disadvantaged MUs. Diddy Kong vs Marth is 55:45 for those who are curious. With this knowledge, would you still want to ban MK?

Okay, I can do hypothetical questions.

I'm pro-ban, so I guess I get the second question. Keep in mind that my view may not be the same as the rest of the pro-ban side.

Ugh. If that were the case, then we would have Brawl as a 2 character game even with MK, which would be pretty lame. I'd still be proud of getting rid of MK, though. Games which involve Diddy Kong are pretty interesting; even if Brawl were all Diddy dittos, all the time, it would still be a fun game with a lot of strategically interesting stuff going on. Throwing MK into the mix would STILL make the game worse, even if MK were somehow one of the last ways to increase diversity (lol at THAT nonsensical thought).

Yeah, that pretty much summarizes my view. I'd rather see 100% Diddys in tournaments than 50% MK, 50% Diddy, because MK makes the complaints leveled at Brawl accusing it of being a bad competitive game, true. Adding diversity to a game is useless if the stuff you add to the game to make it more diverse is utter crap that actually makes the game worse than if it wasn't there at all.

Fortunately, this hypothetical is pretty unlikely. Removing MK is much more likely to BOTH increase diversity AND remove the worst existing game component.

 

[Xyro77]

But in that case, smash is SUPPOSED to be played with items.

COMPETITIVE SMASH. Not casual

who said smash was all about CPing? most people are still going to cling to their mains, a few high tiers can't *really* be character CP'd, if I go all snake I'm not going to be bothered by someone getting off their main to play a character that barely beats me but they haven't practiced nearly as much.

COMPETITIVE smash is about CPing........since melee.


In melee if a match-up wasnt in your favor you could CPed by STAGE or by CHARACTER and it would turn the match-up a little.


Brawl works the SAME way if meta is gone.

Now CLEARLY if its m2k vs random newb3000 it wont matter who the newb CPs. Im talking at medium to high level of smash.


Did people really forget this? Im VERY sad.

 

[Marshall.SoLongArletta]

COMPETITIVE SMASH. Not casual






COMPETITIVE smash is about CPing........since melee.


In melee if a match-up wasnt in your favor you could CPed by STAGE or by CHARACTER and it would turn the match-up a little.


Brawl works the SAME way if meta is gone.

Now CLEARLY if its m2k vs random newb3000 it wont matter who the newb CPs. Im talking at medium to high level of smash.


Did people really forget this? Im VERY sad.

I believe he is talking more about the higher tier characters (especially mk) who dont really have any bad matchups, if someone switches from a 60-40 matchup to a 55-45 matchup is it really going to bother you enough to make you switch your character? Probably not, the same could be said about snake, and diddy for the most part

 

[Rian]

First off. I prefer Melee over Brawl. I dislike Brawl because of the slower gameplay and more camping attitude of the game. This however does not mean that I resent the Brawl community in any way but it does imply that my knowledge of match-ups, advanced techniques and other Brawl related issues are little to not know to me.

My post is based on the fact that I see a lot of posting about statistical and mathematical data. I'm a first year student Econometrics and Operational Research at the University of Groningen. I past both my mathematical and statistical exams with an 8. This does not make me a professional whatsoever but I'm simply trying to tell I know the basics of statistical and mathematical analytics. If someone here (and there very likely is) has a more advanced knowledge of these studies feel free to back me up or correct me. It would be truly appreciated.

That being said I'd like to post what has been on my mind for quite a while now.

The Meta-Knight issue is a hot subject and opinions about it are widely spread. In many posts I see people referring to 'statistical' data. Although most of this data can be interpreted in many ways, almost everyone tries to 'explain' this data with their biased opinion. To clearify this a bit I'm quoting some of Overswarm's threads.

I'd like to start off with why I do not agree with the measures used by Overswarm and the overall tier lists. Although I agree this might not be feasible datawise, it's still a big issue in my mind. I can be completely wrong about this, but my logic just punches a lot of holes through the whole point system.

Let's say Super Smash Sisters had two characters, Betsy and Bertha. The first tournament had been organized and the results are in. We know that the results are always going to be close to the results of this tournament (just an assumption so I don't have to make a 100 examples). Smashboards.com is anxious to analyze the results!

1. Betsy
2. Betsy
3. Bertha
4. Bertha
5. Betsy
6. Betsy
7. Betsy
8. Betsy
9. Bertha
10. Betsy

Betsy - 21pts
Bertha - 8pts

Now it is obvious that Betsy is SS-tier and Bertha is Noobette-tier, right?

What if I added that from 11 to 32 were all Bertha's and 33 to 50 were all Betsy's? Making the total number of Betsy's and Bertha's 25 and 25.

Including everyone may add lesser skilled players, but this counts for all the characters. This does not only represent the community as a whole but can also shed light to major match-up problems of which the pro's may be aware off but the less gifted smasher may not notice. Since banning a character is a rule which affects the WHOLE community, one should look at the effect it has on the WHOLE community. Not just the pro's. That's being elitist.

Just think about what should be done in this case.

Anyways that's kindoff off topic, back to the matter at hand! Whilst looking through the data provided by Overswarm. The one thing that truly stood out the most was the data provided by Overswarm's thread about Meta-Knight's dominance in the top 8. This can not be ignored, since it is simply so. However there are quite some conclusions which are highly doubtable from a statistical point of view.

results show a RISE in metaknight usage AND victory

If the pro-banning community is right, the number of Meta-Knight's attending a tournament should have a small impact on the number of Meta-Knight's in the top 8.

This might not be so obvious at first, but assuming that Meta-Knight is broken, adding a 1000 Meta-Knight's with a random skill level would have little to no affect to the top 8. Since it is already loaded with Meta-Knight's (assuming he is broken).

So is there even a rise? Since you based this on results. And that being the case you actually contradict that Meta-Knight is broken since a rise in Meta-Knight players isn't really affecting the top 8 charts.

But let's assume for the sake there is a rise.

If we hypotheticly speaking had a game with one character, one stage and every attendy had the same skill level. The only distinction between this one character is it's color.

• 25% - Blue
• 25% - Yellow
• 25% - Red
• 25% - Green

Which color would statisticly speaking be represented the most in the top 8?

• 15% - Blue
• 10% - Yellow
• 50% - Red
• 25% - Green

How about now?

This little hypothetical experiment is the current case however. There are more Meta-Knight's competing and there are more Meta-Knight's victorious.

As long as there is no record of the number of attending characters in total, these stat's really don't mean anything. It could simply mean that either Meta-Knight is broken, the Meta-Knight players have a higher level of play, the non-Meta-Knight players fear Meta-Knight or there is an abundance of Meta-Knight players. Picking the one that favors your opinion the most has nothing to do with statistics.

But the graph which actually proves completely nothing is the graph of tournament attendence. There are numerous examples of correlation between the most distance variables.

It is know that there is a strong correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks. However these two have nothing to do with each other. Can you think of the real reason?

One of the most reveiling of all is those between the number of storks in a certain and the number of children born in the same area. The phenomenon has been studied a while ago in the Netherlands and they actually found a significant correlation between the two. The real reason however is that families who want to have children often moved out of the city or even into the sub-urbs (and sub-urbs in the Netherlands are pretty different to those in the US). At these places storks could actually live and breed. Many dutch farmers have artificial stork's nests placed in their fields.

Now take these weird correlations and compare them to yours. I could think of a lot of reasons why tourney attendence could be less. People get bored with the metagame. Less tourney's were being hosted. Maybe even the credit-crunch? Which could simply explain why there was less hosting and less attendency. I mean, back your numbers up. That graph really doesn't mean anything.

I don't mean this personally. It's just an observation I made and maybe something you should dig into if you really believe the Meta-Knight ban is legit. Just back up your facts and try to persuade TO's into collecting more data. If the larger part of the community believes that the Metal Kirby is truly that broken, let them give you some more data to work with.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Xyro, Smash has never been about counterpicking.

 

[Monshou_no_Nazo]

Now take these weird correlations and compare them to yours. I could think of a lot of reasons why tourney attendence could be less. People get bored with the metagame. Less tourney's were being hosted. Maybe even the credit-crunch? Which could simply explain why there was less hosting and less attendency. I mean, back your numbers up. That graph really doesn't mean anything.

When I first saw the tournament attendance issue brought up, my first thought was "Street Fighter 4" and the various other fighting games coming out that would take some attention away from Brawl.

 

[etecoon]

I believe he is talking more about the higher tier characters (especially mk) who dont really have any bad matchups, if someone switches from a 60-40 matchup to a 55-45 matchup is it really going to bother you enough to make you switch your character? Probably not, the same could be said about snake, and diddy for the most part

this. snake, diddy, and maybe wario or marth without MK in the game don't need to character CP at all. the few matchups they lose aren't by a wide enough margin to make it worth it to play a character you're not as good with. IC's would be in the same boat if not for snake.

Ofcourse MK has flaws. He's the 5th (?) lightest character in the game and no projectile. Can you capitalize on such flaws consistently w/o taking two years of practice? Not quite...

why would you expect someone who's picked up the game recently to do as well as people who've played the game for two years? experience counts, banning MK isn't going to change that.

and he also has weaknesses in the form of horrendous horizontal air speed, a weak shield that is easily poked, transcendent priority prevents his attacks from protecting him which makes it a lot easier to trade hits with him than other characters(bad for him vs most characters especially someone like snake, MK having a laser priority of a sword also makes mid-range projectiles more effective vs him than other swordsmen), a lot of characters have grab release tricks on him, mediocre standing grab. yeah, he's really really amazing and I do think he might warrant a ban because of the fact that he can skirt anti-stalling rules like ledge grab limits in ways other characters can't, but this idea that he has no weaknesses is ********.

 

[Dark.Pch]

So after study some frames and etc, you boys might wanna keep this in mind to just how hard it is to abuse Meta being gay on the ledge.

Upair-
frame breakdown:
1 startup
2-3 hitbox out
4-13 aerial cooldown

frame summary:
Hits on: 2
IASA frame: 14
Aerial cooldown: 10
Landing lag: 12
Autocancels on: 21
Shield hitlag differential: 0
Shield stun: 2
Optimal shield advantage: -10
Optimal shield drop advantage: -3

This is of course a problem for everyone when he is on his crap on the stage. And lots of characters dont have an option to dealing with this.

Meta has to let go of the ledge then hop to an uair.

6+2= 8 Frames the move comes out. when he lets go, he gets 21 frames of invis. ( I treat every character to jump 6 frames until I can get full info on how long it takes for specific characters to do it)

21-8=13 frames he can't be touched while he does the attack.

Now lets say meta was to try and grab the ledge after one upair. When you let go of the ledge, you can not grab it for 30 frames. So when he lets go, jumps and does the move, the IASA frames kick in at frame 14.

30-14= 16 frames he has to do something else. So meta can not grab the ledge after one up air. Move ends too soon and has 16 frames to wait. For this meta would just do another uair
16-14= 2 frames he can't touch the ledge. By this time, it is hard to even abuse this while he is off stage. You would have to be lucky enough to have a move dished out already to hit this fool out of it.

When you let go, you are invis for 21 frames.

30-21= 19 frames one is able to get hit before being able to grab the ledge.

Now the aerial cool down of the move. Its 10 frames. and the move ends at 14 frames (IASA)

14-10= 4 frames he is a sitting duck before he can do anything. So Moves that hit in 4 frames or less can abuse this. (good to know if you power shield his moves and he is over you, or near him on stage while he does this.)

Now that we got all that info, lets put it into play here:

To do the attack off the ledge drop with a jump: 8 frames Move is out for 10 frames But has 4 frames that he can't do anything. So total duration of the move is 14. Invis off the ledge is 21 frames. 21-14= 7 frames of invis. and able to do something else. And would meta would do is another upair. Now around this time, meta can't be touched for 7 frames. The move is out for ten frames. 10-7= 3 frames the move is still out but him not being invinsible anymore. Now you have 3 frames to hit meta before he can do anything.

Keep in mind, you can't grab the ledge for 30 frames after a ledge drop. So now we have to add Upair x2 - 30 frames you cant touch the ledge

14+14=28
30-28=2

This dude has a 2 frame wait before grabbing the ledge. And if you know about Peachs jab, that is not a long wait. Meta can not be punished inbetween upairs cause he still have invis frames after doing the first one. If you wanna hit this fool, you have to do a move within 2 frames or less Or have an attack dish out ready to hit him within those 2 frames.


Now for 2 Uairs it would be 28 frames in total. (can't touch him out the first one anyway) and 21 invis frames once you let go. And I already went through that. A few paragraphs above.


So from what it looks like, trying to punish meta for this (frame perfect winse here) It's seriously hard to do so. You are giving 2 frames to do so. Thats not a good amout of time for us. Not I have not taken into account about meta doing one up air, taking the time to jump yet again and do another one. So we would have about a few more frames? Still freaking hard as hell, even if not frame perfect to hit this fool.


Now shielding his Uair if he puts up over the stage a lil if near the ledge:

7+2= 9 frames it takes to dish out a move.
7= frames to drop the shield
2= Shield stun from meta.

Now after the move, meta is a sitting duck for 4 frames.

9-4= 5 frames you have to punish this fool out of shield. His upair all above him to begin with. it takes nine frames to dish out a move from shield if you get hit with upair so:

9-6= frames we have to abuse. And after 2 upairs, meta has 2 frames to grab the ledge. It's really hard to do this. Power shielding may help out here. Doing that to some ground attacks that can somehow reach meta and hit him at the anngle that he is at. Stuff is too hard anyway. And he does not have to use Uair all the time nether. He can go with his other air attacks.


NAIR
frame breakdown:
1-2 startup
3-4 strong hitbox out
5-25 weak hitbox out
26-31 aerial cooldown

frame summary:
Hits on frame: 3
IASA frame: 32
Aerial cooldown: 6
Landing lag: 15
Autocancels on: 25
Shield hitlag differential strong hit: 0
Shield hitlag differential weak hit: -1
Shield stun strong hit: 4
Shield stun weak hit: 1
Optimal shield advantage strong hit: -11
Optimal shield drop advantage strong hit: -4
Optimal shield advantage weak hit: -15
Optimal shield advantage weak hit: -8
*Optimal shield advantage weak hit autocanceled: -2
*Optimal shield shield drop advantage weak hit autocanceled: +5

* Note that doing this is unrealistic because of how the nair works. It would be very difficult to hit a shield with the weak hitbox and then immediately land into the ac point. You would most all the time be hitting the top area of the shield and then falling until you land.


FAIR
frame breakdown:
1-5 startup
6-7 hitbox out
8-9
10-11 hitbox out
12
13-14 hitbox out
15-39 aerial cooldown

frame summary:
1st hit on: 6
2nd hit on: 10
3rd hit on: 13
IASA frame: 40
Aerial cooldown: 25
Landing lag: 15
Autocancels on: 21
Shield hitlag differential: 0
Shield stun: 1
Optimal shield advantage: -8
Optimal shield drop advantage: -1


BAIR
frame breakdown:
1-6 startup
7-8 hitbox out
9-12
13-14 hitbox out
15-19
20-21 hitbox out
22-45 aerial cooldown

frame summary:
1st hit on: 7
2nd hit on: 13
3rd hit on: 20
IASA frame: 46
Aerial cooldown: 24
Landing lag: 12
Autocancel on: 23
Shield hitlag differential: 0
Shield stun: 1
Optimal shield advantage: -3
Optimal shield drop advantage: +4


DAIR
frame breakdown:
1-3 startup
4-5 hitbox out
6-25 aerial cooldown

frame summary:
hits on frame: 4
IASA frame: 26
Aerial cooldown: 20
Landing lag: 15
Autocancels on: 24
Shield hitlag differential: 0
Shield stun: 2
Optimal shield advantage: -13
Optimal shield drop advantage: -6
Shield advantage without landing: -18
Shield drop advantage without landing: -11

GROUNDED SHUTTLE LOOP
frame breakdown:
1-7 startup
5-8 invincibility frames
8-13 strong hitbox out
14-21
22-31 weak hitbox out

frame summary:
Hits on frame: 8
IASA frame: 32


AERIAL SHUTTLE LOOP
frame breakdown:
1-7 startup
8-14 strong hitbox out
15-36 weak hitbox out

frame summary:
hits on frame: 8
IASA frame: 38

Something for people to think about.

 

[Xyro77]

Xyro, Smash has never been about counterpicking.

plz go away. you really dont know anything.

 

[KoRoBeNiKi]

plz go away. you really dont know anything.

In barlw you win the first match and then lose the next 1 and then win the last. Theres too many anti-character stages.....

Spoiler

unless your metaknight

 

[Kewkky]

In barlw you win the first match and then lose the next 1 and then win the last. Theres too many anti-character stages.....

Spoiler

unless your metaknight

You're just looking at the bad sets. What about the good sets, you know... The ones that turn around after a good CP?

A Kirby and ICs mainer vs a G&W and Falco mainer. 1st match, Kirby vs G&W, G&W wins. 2nd match, ICs vs G&W, ICs win. 3rd match, ICs vs Falco, ICs win... BAM! Your counterpick helped win the match.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

and why are people that don't play brawl arguing matchups in brawl -_-

I don't see what the problem with that is.

I enjoy the debate, but the outcome doesn't matter to me.

 

[mangojuice]

I've been lurking on these forums forever and this topic is one that I'd like to chime in on. For the record, I'm first and foremost a Street Fighter player, but I recently bout a Wii because I loved playing Smash so much. It's the only wii game i own. In essence, I'm a newb and don't know much. Normally, I'd keep quiet but in a case the problem extends beyond game play. What I say is assuming that MK is indeed decreasing attendence.

The one thing I want to say is this: Don't take for granted the popularity of smash and keeping its community, including the scrubs/average/non-elite players happy. Brawl outsold Street fighter4 3-1. The SF tournamnet scene is largely a niche scene and it in general struggles for attendence . Trust me, you do not want to be in the same boat as other fighters. Use the fact that Smash appeals to the masses to your advantage.

People before me have already said this, but have been largely ignored. Scrubs/avg smashers/are not irrelevant in this discussion. Elite players are but a fraction of the entire player base, but are reliant on smashers not as skilled as them to pad the cash pools. Try to see this situation from an avg joe perspective because without them, say good by to $$. If it affects them, it affects the elite as well.

Honestly, it really is that simple. Even if changes make absolutely no sense, if it is causing the scene to die, then action needs to be taken. I see people going on for pages talking about frame data and tournament results when the most important part of the MK issue is largely ignored.

 

[loki15]

Long-time lurker here.

One of the main things that keeps appearing in anti-ban arguments is the lack of a summarized set of ban conditions. It would probably be a good idea to create a consolidated list of ban conditions from the pro-ban side of the argument. Even if this differs from the original ban conditions list from RDK. Then at least there's some common ground upon which to argue; whether or not MK fis within the qualities established by the agreed pro-ban conditions. It's next to impossible to debate without a universally accepted set of points to discuss.

On another note.

To accommodate all but the top 1%, if that, in an entire community is ridiculous. While creating rules to accommodate the casual player seems almost as ridiculous to a competitive player, at least you might have a higher turn-out, and therefore more $. However, I believe that the goal of the rules should be to appease the average, competitive player. This will need to be defined of course, but it can be seen in other, professionally competitive sports as well. Banning metaknight could be seen as a sort of salary cap, in terms of tools available to the character. Having MK in the game could very well be seen as baseball, a sport with no salary cap. Yes, every once in a while, the game may see extreme outliers (in smash, Ally and ADHD), but it's almost always the teams with the highest salary caps (Yankees, anyone?) that win. However, if you look at a sport like football, which has a salary cap, the winners are generally much more diversified, and a team retaining supremacy for more than one or two years is the outlier.

 

[Rian]

I see people going on for pages talking about frame data and tournament results when the most important part of the MK issue is largely ignored.

Then what's the real problem with Meta-Knight? For all I can see from a completely unbiased view (I really have only touched Brawl's 1P-mode) is that Meta-Knight players are abundant.

Again, TO's have the choice to make up their own rules. Try some stuff out and see what happens. Talking about opinions, emotions and such have nothing to do with an unbiased view of what to do about Meta-Knight. If you believe the community is suffering under Meta-Knight, state exactly why. It might be that there is something else going on.

Don't forget it's in human nature to find a scapegoat. It happens with politicians, CEO's, minorities, busdrivers and even your own parents. Proof that it is truly Meta-Knight and not just how the metagame is evolving. It might be that a lot of players start to believe Melee is the better of the two because it's metagame doesn't revolve about camping as much as in Brawl. It could just simply be that Brawl itself is dying...

Again I'm sprouting random theories just as the lot of you guys actually are.

 

[Chuee]

plz go away. you really dont know anything.

Smash is not about CPing at all. At mid-high levels of play, players learn to deal with bad MU's instead of switching characters like low level players. Maybe for mid-low tier characters CPing characters is slightly more important, but for higher tiered characters there isn't hardly any reason to switch characters.
Stage CPing is definitely more important though.

I remember someone saying in one of the poll threads awhile ago that mk doesn't destroy the CP system because it doesn't exist.

 

[Xyro77]

I remember someone saying in one of the poll threads awhile ago that mk doesn't destroy the CP system because it doesn't exist.

it does exist but its rendered useless if meta enters a match.

 

[loki15]

If a CP system, for both stages and characters, is that integral to many characters, which it is, wouldn't one character rendering that useless lead to stagnant metagame development, at least in that part? Especially if that character consistently takes top spots at large tournaments, and whose other tournament results completely dominate the next best character?
Wasn't that one of the conditions for considering banning?

 

[Judo777]

Smash is not about CPing at all. At mid-high levels of play, players learn to deal with bad MU's instead of switching characters like low level players. Maybe for mid-low tier characters CPing characters is slightly more important, but for higher tiered characters there isn't hardly any reason to switch characters.
Stage CPing is definitely more important though.

I remember someone saying in one of the poll threads awhile ago that mk doesn't destroy the CP system because it doesn't exist.

Yea CPing stages is important too bad MK is absolutely devastating on every stage. The concept of counterpicking is that u pick a stage to counter ur opponent then he can pick a character to better cope with the stage then u can of course pick a character to better handle their change in character. That how it works but when someone changes to MK step 3 of that prcess is void cause u cant pick a character to counter or even hardly cope with MK.

Its really dumb that half of the players I have played all second MK and if i CP them to a stage like Brinstar, oh crap they have a pocket MK which is ridiculous on Brinstar so i guess i lose my cp ability. The same applies for almost every level. CP RC crap they have a pocket MK. CP Frigate, piss they second MK. CP Delfino omg they have a pocket MK! Oh ill get em on norfair, oh great he seconds MK too......

 

[Chuee]

CPing doesn't mean you have to have the advantage.....................................

 

[mangojuice]

Then what's the real problem with Meta-Knight? For all I can see from a completely unbiased view (I really have only touched Brawl's 1P-mode) is that Meta-Knight players are abundant.

Again, TO's have the choice to make up their own rules. Try some stuff out and see what happens. Talking about opinions, emotions and such have nothing to do with an unbiased view of what to do about Meta-Knight. If you believe the community is suffering under Meta-Knight, state exactly why. It might be that there is something else going on.

Don't forget it's in human nature to find a scapegoat. It happens with politicians, CEO's, minorities, busdrivers and even your own parents. Proof that it is truly Meta-Knight and not just how the metagame is evolving. It might be that a lot of players start to believe Melee is the better of the two because it's metagame doesn't revolve about camping as much as in Brawl. It could just simply be that Brawl itself is dying...

Again I'm sprouting random theories just as the lot of you guys actually are.

I don't know if there is actually is a problem with meta-knight per se. I won't pretend to know either.

I posted under the assumption that MK is causing tournament play to deteriorate. I didn't come up with statement, but others who are far more learned and experienced in the Smash world did. If MK is not causing a deterioration in tournament play/community, then my post is moot.

I don't have the Smash know how to make an informed decision if i do or don't want MK banned. I was just pointing out that people have forgotten one of the most important factors on why MK should/shouldn't be banned. If he doesn't deteriorate the community, then I have no thing else to say. I have nothing helpful to add when talking about meta game progression and the like.

Compared to other fighters, sometimes I get the feeling that Smash doesn't know how good they have it when it comes to the abundance of players.

 

[loki15]

The point of a CP system is to either give yourself an advantage, or put your opponent at a disadvantage. With the inclusion of a character whose weaknesses are far outweighed by his strengths, and the exclusion of all stages that could potentially put this character at a disadvantage, the CP system becomes moot.

Either MK needs to be banned, or something needs to be established that has the potential to put him at a disadvantage. With the current set of rules, it is impossible. Therefore, while MetaKnight may not be broken, due to mechanics, the established ruleset, specifically stage list, that seeks to create a sense of balance while still retaining a competitive nature, puts MetaKnight at a consistent, advantageous position. This can't be fixed by minor "surgical" changes to specific elements in MK's gameplay. Larger changes, including the potential ban, must be made in order to have a (more) balanced game.

 

[Inui]

plz go away. you really dont know anything.

Gheb is right, though.

 

[Chuee]

CP system barely even exists at high levels of play.

 

[loki15]

But the BBR still went out of their way to establish rules for it. Maybe counter-picking doesn't make too much difference at the highest level of play, but the BBR made rules to accommodate the average competitive player. Which is also who the MK ban would affect the most.