Planking Info (G&W Added)

[rathy Aro]

So... in an incredibly defensive game... you really wanna remove the incentive to approach, really?


I promise, if this every happens, my matches will take a minimium of 4 hours. This is not even abnormal, on high stakes competative gaming, people have shown they're willing to do worse.


I am extremely patient, I am totally willing to play gay. For the love of god, give me an incentive to actually do damage or my opponent an incentive to damage me.

What's the initial incentive to approach when both players are at 0 percent and one doesn't out camp the other (this should be common since you don't seem to think anyone out camps anyone).

 

[HeroMystic]

What's the initial incentive to approach when both players are at 0 percent and one doesn't out camp the other (this should be common since you don't seem to think anyone out camps anyone).

To avoid stalling. Technically, the approaching character will always be more open than the defensive character. But one will have to approach otherwise it'd be considered stalling.

 

[salaboB]

To avoid stalling. Technically, the approaching character will always be more open than the defensive character. But one will have to approach otherwise it'd be considered stalling.

Stalling by who?

Does it mean the character with the stronger defensive setup than offensive gets to sit and wait for their opponent to be forced to attack them, or get dq'ed for stalling?

Who has to move to attack in a ditto? Or is this just a great big game of chicken - "Who can hold out closest to being dq'ed for stalling before you both get hit for a rule violation?"

 

[Throwback]

are there any characters that don't have an option which beats MK's uair? Perhaps ganon? Although if a dair does get through MK takes a stock, so I probably wouldn't be game to do it as MK

 

[DMG]

Lol.

You would be scared... to Plank Ganondorf? When you can Uair 2 times and be completely invincible as each one would hit? I guess Planking is not for you sir.

 

[Throwback]

well MK's hitboxes don't stay out very long, and there are 9 frames of vulnerability remember. Ganon can jump OOS right on the ledge and if he times the dair in a way that MK misses, dead MK

 

[DMG]

Framewise it's not possible for Ganondorf to do that, if MK's Uair does in fact hit his shield. Ganon's Dair (including how long it takes for him to jump off the ground) is slow enough for MK to safely avoid, even when not invincible.

 

[HeroMystic]

Stalling by who?

Does it mean the character with the stronger defensive setup than offensive gets to sit and wait for their opponent to be forced to attack them, or get dq'ed for stalling?

Who has to move to attack in a ditto? Or is this just a great big game of chicken - "Who can hold out closest to being dq'ed for stalling before you both get hit for a rule violation?"

That's where it becomes subjective, thus if both have an opinionated judgement of being accused of stalling, both would be inclined to approach one-another.

Btw, I'm not for limitless matches. That's ********. I'm just saying that's the only incentive to approach in a defensive game: Another rule.

 

[Nanaki]

Can you think of any other way to ban MKs unbeatable planking?

By banning MK?

If-not, this is a far better solution than a full ban, as I guarantee any MK main would prefer to have their beatable and unbeatable planking banned, instead of the entire character.

It's just an all around better solution.

If "scrooging" (god I hate that term) proves to be 'unbeatable' by most characters, do we ban MK from picking Smashville?

I'd like some explanation as to how it's an 'all around better solution'. Is it because the MK mains will cry justice-filled tears of grief when their broken character gets banned instead of putting multiple rules in place to 'fix' him?

He's not breaking any game mechanics. He doesn't HAVE to sit there and grab the ledge after doing 2 uairs every single time. He has 5654829320945757 options from that point, none of which break the game's engine (ala IDC). He can hop around offstage for awhile, he can glide underneath it, he can (scarily enough, I know!) hop up and fair you in the face, reverse-SL gimp you if you're dumb enough to chase him, hop onto the stage and air camp for awhile, tornado back onstage and land a safe distance from you, WHATEVER.

Adding some random number of ledge grabs for MK only won't solve the problem. If someone wants to play as 'gay' as possible with MK, they'll do it anyway. Odds are most people still won't do it out of some sense of 'honor' or 'fun' at the tournaments we're currently hosting, but when big $$'s on the line, people will show their true colors. Especially now that the data showing how broken his ledge game really is can be found right here.

 

[theunabletable]

If "scrooging" (god I hate that term) proves to be 'unbeatable' by most characters, do we ban MK from picking Smashville?

I'm talking about planking, not scrooging.

I'd like some explanation as to how it's an 'all around better solution'. Is it because the MK mains will cry justice-filled tears of grief when their broken character gets banned instead of putting multiple rules in place to 'fix' him?

It breaks the stalling rule according to DMGs data. A ledge grab rule to enforce that no stalling rule is better than banning the character over something that ALREADY BREAKS THE RULES.

He doesn't HAVE to sit there and grab the ledge after doing 2 uairs every single time.

He doesn't have to, but this prevents it, and happens to prevent his other type of beatable stalling as well (but it seems to be the only viable option for stopping his unbeatableplanking).

Adding some random number of ledge grabs for MK only won't solve the problem.

It'll stop him from being unbeatable like DMGs data suggests. And it limits his other kinds of planking really, really hard, as well. That's not the point, though. I'm suggesting that a ledge grab rule be in effect to stop this unbeatable stalling that truly seems to make the game unplayable (quite like Jiggs' rising pound); because what DMG is talking ALREADY breaks the SBR rules of stalling, but there is no way to enforce that without a ledge grab limit, or banning MK entirely.

And banning MK because he can break the rules with stalling when we have a perfectly acceptable way to enforce those rules is just ridiculous.

If someone wants to play as 'gay' as possible with MK, they'll do it anyway.

They can't really plank like what DMG is talking about with 25 ledge grabs.

And why are you bringing up his other forms of stalling? That's nothing more than being off topic. This topic is about the PLANKING that DMG is talking about. I am saying that that planking fits the SBR description of stalling, thus something needs to be done to stop that. A ledge grab limit seems to be the only viable option for stopping MK from being able to do what DMG is talking about, or a complete MK ban instead of a ledge grab limit applying solely to MK just to enforce a previously made rule.

Obviously in this scenario (not bringing up everything else he can do as that is for the MK discussion thread, not the planking thread) a ledge grab limit to enforce the stalling rule that this breaks is a far better solution than an MK ban.

It's stupid to ban MK for planking when the planking that DMG is talking about seems to fit under the SBR definition of stalling (it truly seems to make the game unplayable, and its only purpose is to stall). There's no way to enforce that rule that this already breaks, so it seems the only real way to justifiably enforce that rule would be to have a ledge grab limit.

 

[Nanaki]

Stuff

Alright, I'll avoid other forms of 'stalling' for now. Sorry for offtopic.

Your argument seems to boil down to 'Planking fits the SBR definition of stalling, which is already banned, we therefore should put a limit on it to make sure it's enforced', correct?

From the ruleset v2.0:

Stalling: The act of deliberately avoiding any and all conflict so that one may make the game unplayable. Running away from an opponent to reach a better position is not stalling, while doing an infinite grab endlessly against a wall is. Any infinite chain grabs must end quickly after 300% has been reached so as to prevent excessive stalling.

I'll go ahead and agree with you - planking in the way DMG has defined it appears to be truly unbeatable and may make the game 'unplayable'.

If you 'plank' without doing the 2 uairs or the downB, is it beatable? The answer is most certainly yes.

My rant in the previous post was mostly driving home the point that the action of 'unbeatable planking' is so very similar to 'beatable planking' that you're in effect banning something which DOESN'T fit the SBR definition of stalling. In fact, it says right in the rule that running away to reach a better position (for MK, offstage or the ledge) is NOT stalling. With a ledgegrab rule, it's entirely possible that someone not intending to 'stall' by the SBR's definition would be DQ'd when he didn't break a single rule.

That, to me, is MUCH more unfair than banning a character that has, in effect, been proven to be absolutely broken.

 

[adumbrodeus]

What's the initial incentive to approach when both players are at 0 percent and one doesn't out camp the other (this should be common since you don't seem to think anyone out camps anyone).

Interacting at the neutral position is fundamentally about as neutral a position as possible in a given MU, you can take advantage there but neither player is inherently advantaged. Once the risk of losing comes into play, the timer becomes important.

 

[theunabletable]

My rant in the previous post was mostly driving home the point that the action of 'unbeatable planking' is so very similar to 'beatable planking' that you're in effect banning something which DOESN'T fit the SBR definition of stalling.

How else do we ban the unbeatable stalling without banning the beatable stalling?

That, to me, is MUCH more unfair than banning a character that has, in effect, been proven to be absolutely broken.

I can't possibly see how. If it applies only to MK, sure it limits something that's beatable about him, but ask ANY MK main which they would rather have:
A ledge grab limit
Or MK banned

I guaran-****ing-tee you'll get the former.

It's slightly unfair to MK, sure, but no where near to the level that banning the entire character as a whole due to something that ALREADY breaks the rules, instead of making a limitation on him to stop him from breaking those rules.

It would be absolutely ******** to ban MK for DMGs kinds planking if it fits the SBR definition of stalling and an easy to enforce rule was made to enforce a previously established rule.

It's not unfair to anyone else, G&W and Pit would be allowed to plank to their hearts content. MK wouldn't be able to, sure, but that is far better, more logical, and more fair than outright banning the character for a technique that ALREADY BREAKS THE RULES.

No MK main would say it's more unfair to have their planking limited than to have their whole **** main banned because of something that's already illegal, just not enforceable without putting a limitation on the character.

 

[Nanaki]

How else do we ban the unbeatable stalling without banning the beatable stalling?

Careful! The beatable one isn't actually 'stalling' at it's defined by the BBR. Please, no more mislabeling.

I can't possibly see how. If it applies only to MK, sure it limits something that's beatable about him, but ask ANY MK main which they would rather have:
A ledge grab limit
Or MK banned

I guaran-****ing-tee you'll get the former.

It's slightly unfair, sure, but no where near to the level that banning the entire character as a whole due to something that ALREADY breaks the rules, instead of making a limitation on him to stop him from breaking those rules.

It would be absolutely ******** to ban MK for DMGs kinds planking if it fits the SBR definition of stalling and an easy to enforce rule was made to enforce a previously established rule.

It's not unfair to anyone else, G&W and Pit would be allowed to plank to their hearts content. MK wouldn't be able to, sure, but that is far better, more logical, and more fair than outright banning the character for a technique that ALREADY BREAKS THE RULES.

I get it, you think it ALREADY BREAKS THE RULES. I understand that's your opinion.

Also, nobody's suggesting that this is the only reason to ban the character. It's just the final nail in the coffin. However, that's completely offtopic and I'll stay away from there in this thread.

The problem, which I'm repeating for the last time, is that the side effect of a ledge grab limit is in effect banning something that isn't broken when you're intending to only ban something that is. Banning something that isn't broken (MK's 'beatable' ledge game) goes against every reasonable standard for making rules there is. It isn't about what MK mains would prefer, it's about making rules that actually restrict only the things that need to be restricted in the interest of fairness.

Before you bring up IDC, that was a clearly defined, easy to enforce ban that had no effect beyond the IDC. You can still downB, you just can't hammer up on the c-stick to keep the move going. You don't remove a single thing that isn't against the rules that are already in place.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

They already implemented a ledge grab rule.

ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND

this was the result:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbmu8fGcWaw

Smooth Criminal

 

[theunabletable]

Careful! The beatable one isn't actually 'stalling' at it's defined by the BBR. Please, no more mislabeling.

Sorry, should've said planking.

Still, how do you ban the unbeatable planking without banning the beatable planking?

Also, nobody's suggesting that this is the only reason to ban the character.

I'm not saying that either. I'm saying that this unbeatable planking should have no bearing on whether or not MK gets banned, as it's against the rules.

I'm also saying that the only way to enforce the rules is with a ledge grab limit. Sucks that that would eliminate a beatable form of planking, but as I see it, that is an infinitely better alternative to a straight up UNNECESARY ban.

It's absolutely unnecesary to ban a character due to a tactic that breaks the rules we already have in place, ESPECIALLY if we can ENFORCE that rule (which we can).

The problem, which I'm repeating for the last time, is that the side effect of a ledge grab limit is in effect banning something that isn't broken when you're intending to only ban something that is. Banning something that isn't broken (MK's 'beatable' ledge game) goes against every reasonable standard for making rules there is. It isn't about what MK mains would prefer, it's about making rules that actually restrict only the things that need to be restricted in the interest of fairness.

(before you reply to what I'm about to say, just be aware that I'm stating this as if planking was the only thing that made MK broken enough to get banned. Imo if he's bannable in any other way other than planking he should be banned, but I'm disregarding in this next part all other arguments for banning MK OTHER than planking (because it's irrelevant); because I'm trying to say that if the only thing he has that's bannable is DMGs planking, then he shouldn't be banned (not that it is the only thing, but don't bring those other things up as that's off topic and completely unrelated to what I'm trying to say)

Banning MK for planking is banning something that isn't broken (IE the rest of MK that is beatable).

Limiting his beatable planking just for the sake of enforcing the no stalling rule upon his unbeatable planking seems like the much lesser of two evils.

If you can think of an alternative way to enforce the no stalling rule that doesn't limit his beatable planking, then shoot away.

To me your argument ("ledge grab limits limit an unbroken aspect of him, so lets ban the character in its entirety (including its balanced parts) instead") is just unnecesary and ridiculous.

I just don't see how banning the entire character due to something that breaks the rules we already have is better than an added rule to enforce the rules we already have, that just happens to limit his non-broken parts.

By the way, deleting a character altogether limits what that character can do pretty badly. Just saying...

They already implemented a ledge grab rule.

ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNND

this was the result:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbmu8fGcWaw

Smooth Criminal

That wasn't the planking that DMG proposed.

Your post is more fitted to go in the MK ban thread, not the planking thread.

 

[Lenus Altair]

The data here shows that MKs planking is practically a no risk strategy. He always has multiple safe ways to respond while a select few opponents either have one very dangerous option(perfect shield and respond), or none at all.

That being said to me it seems strange to ban/restrict a tactic that puts you in the optimum position. That's what planking is for metaknight. It is his optimum way to be played.

the unable table has suggested that Planking is a form of stalling. The rule for stalling is described thus:

Stalling: The act of deliberately avoiding any and all conflict so that one may make the game unplayable. Running away from an opponent to reach a better position is not stalling, while doing an infinite grab endlessly against a wall is. Any infinite chain grabs must end quickly after 300% has been reached so as to prevent excessive stalling.

A Metaknight who is planking is not deliberately avoiding conflict, they're taking the optimum position to fight back. They will surely attack you if you get in range of a uair unless you manage to take the edge from them, in which case theyll probably just go to other one... which translates to me as running away from your opponent to reach a better position.

Really planking is just another name for a specific form of camping. Just because some one is camping (Like MK dair camping) doesn't mean they're stalling/avoiding conflict.


So yeah. Unless some has data to prove it otherwise, MK's planking is a strategy which no character has an effective response for.

That warrent's something for sure...

 

[theunabletable]

^Looking at DMGs data, it looks like he DOES make the game "unplayable" as he is literally untouchable if done right.

 

[Asdioh]

The problem, which I'm repeating for the last time, is that the side effect of a ledge grab limit is in effect banning something that isn't broken when you're intending to only ban something that is. Banning something that isn't broken (MK's 'beatable' ledge game) goes against every reasonable standard for making rules there is. It isn't about what MK mains would prefer, it's about making rules that actually restrict only the things that need to be restricted in the interest of fairness.

****, so I just realized. If MK can switch between "literally unbeatable" planking and "beatable planking" at will, there is no way to enforce that he is only doing the "beatable planking." Ledge grab limits fail http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=9720299&postcount=7845
(this post doesn't have finely calculated statistics or anything)

There is no other option but to ban MK :O

 

[Lenus Altair]

^Looking at DMGs data, it looks like he DOES make the game "unplayable" as he is literally untouchable if done right.

I see the operative phrase for the definition being "avoiding any and all conflict" , not "making the game unplayable".

 

[theunabletable]

It's only purpose is to avoid all contact, and it makes the game unplayable. He'll hit you if you get next to him, but the same would happen in Melee if you tried to attack a rising pound stalling Jiggs.

Or like an infinite CG. They're making contact with you, for sure, but they're still stalling even though they're doing damage/hitting you.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

did someone say balanced brawl?

Lol yeah. He's still barely viable. :V

****, so I just realized. If MK can switch between "literally unbeatable" planking and "beatable planking" at will, there is no way to enforce that he is only doing the "beatable planking." Ledge grab limits fail http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=9720299&postcount=7845
(this post doesn't have finely calculated statistics or anything)

There is no other option but to ban MK :O

thisthisthis.

 

[Lenus Altair]

A difference here is MK would be attacking with uair in response to your approach as opposed to attacking to maintain an unending loop.

What is MK's best position on a given level? The edge. Since thats the best place to respond to other players advances, it should be the obvious choice. Going to and camping/planking the edge is running to a better position.

Perhaps the current definition for stalling itself could be worded better... though any rule no matter how its written is subject to interpretation no?

We just see things differently.

 

[theunabletable]

@BPC: Can MK plank in BBrawl lol?

Going to and camping/planking the edge is running to a better position.

Then Jiggs Rising Pound stall (in Melee) off stage is just staying in a better position, right? (I know the MBR doesn't have the exact same stalling rule anymore, but they suggest one. And I've never seen a "no stalling" rule that was really any different than the old one at a tourney...)

 

[J4pu]

@BPC: Can MK plank in BBrawl lol?
Then Jiggs Rising Pound stall (in Melee) off stage is just staying in a better position, right?

more or less, yeah
the only difference would be the ability of the other character to actually reach jiggs, technically anybody can reach MK while he's planking, they just can't do anything once they get there.

 

[Throwback]

Framewise it's not possible for Ganondorf to do that, if MK's Uair does in fact hit his shield. Ganon's Dair (including how long it takes for him to jump off the ground) is slow enough for MK to safely avoid, even when not invincible.

Sure, but I believe that MK pretty much has to do it on prediction. So yes he can avoid it by predicting ganon is going to dair - in whcih case ganon can predict a change-up and ledge-hog, roll away, full-hop....

Once it becomes a game of prediction and MK can lose with 1 mistake, then it's not unbeatable (still in MK's favour though). Of course MK doesn't even need to plank ganon to win, but my point is about every character having an option that punishes the supposedly unpunishable 2 x Uair.

With further regard to punishing the 2nd uair, I'm not sure if luigi or falco can legitimately do anything, despite both having spikes. Luigi may be able to downB if he can get in position (very doubtful considering his abysmal air speed). I don't know if Falco can doublejump back onto stage after a dair? If so that's probably his best bet but it's hella unsafe and doesn't offer an insta-kill like Ganon.

There are probably other characters that can't realistically do anything but I can't think of them off the top of my head

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

@BPC: Can MK plank in BBrawl lol?

Yes. Part of the reason I don't play it.

Sure, but I believe that MK pretty much has to do it on prediction. So yes he can avoid it by predicting ganon is going to dair - in whcih case ganon can predict a change-up and ledge-hog, roll away, full-hop....

Once it becomes a game of prediction and MK can lose with 1 mistake, then it's not unbeatable (still in MK's favour though). Of course MK doesn't even need to plank ganon to win, but my point is about every character having an option that punishes the supposedly unpunishable 2 x Uair.

With further regard to punishing the 2nd uair, I'm not sure if luigi or falco can legitimately do anything, despite both having spikes. Luigi may be able to downB if he can get in position (very doubtful considering his abysmal air speed). I don't know if Falco can doublejump back onto stage after a dair? If so that's probably his best bet but it's hella unsafe and doesn't offer an insta-kill like Ganon.

There are probably other characters that can't realistically do anything but I can't think of them off the top of my head

You're forgetting a few things.

1. MK ***** the living **** out of Ganon with nothing but tornado and upBOOS; he doesn't need to plank.
2. One mistake as ganon with dair->getting upB'd->ganon offstage. Ganon also only has to make one mistake to lose a stock, but the margin for error is much larger.

 

[C~Dog]

1. MK ***** the living **** out of Ganon with nothing but tornado and upBOOS; he doesn't need to plank.

This. If Metaknight solidly beats a character, then he doesn't need to resort to planking; the point is moot.



It's like debating the Ice Climbers grab release on Ness. It serves no real purpose.

 

[Nanaki]

more stuff

Sorry for the delayed response, I went to bed. Concussion johns.

In short, you and I are at a standstill. Basically, we've come down to arguing opposite sides of OS's 'Surgical vs. Global Changes' thread.

By banning MK's 'unbeatable planking', you're making changes you feel necessary on a very specific portion of MK's game which affects how he can play against a large number of characters. This is a surgical change. You're changing how MK, in effect, can act while in the process of actually playing the game by limiting something that isn't broken ('beatable planking'). Note that while it does only limit MK, you're also changing how each and every character reacts to how he plays as well.

In your opinion, there's nothing wrong with having to change the way MK plays, so long as we can keep the character in the game. You would rather appease the mains of the character than keep the rules as consistent as possible.

In my opinion, removing the character will allow the game to be played exactly as before by all of the remaining members of the cast without any rule changes necessary. This is a global change. I think there's nothing wrong with removing the character if we can't limit him without effecting the way the game is played in any other way. I would rather keep the rules as consistent as possible than appease the mains of the character in question.

Who's right? Well, that's up for the community to decide.

 

[Asdioh]

Who's right?

You! :3

your grandpa would be proud

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hey, not just the LGL. If we're going to be surgically limiting MK, let's implement the "**** you MK stage rule", as I like to call it as well-MK's opponent gets to choose whatever stage they want on all matches against MK. Like, game one, MK vs. Snake. Snake chooses Shadow Moses Island. Game two, MK vs. Falco. Falco chooses Eldin. Game 3, MK vs. Sonic (or fox). Sonic chooses Temple Hyrule.

This way, there's no way in hell he'd be banned! I mean, look at all the bad/potentially bad matchups! Falco, Snake, ICs, possibly wario, maybe Marth, Sonic, maybe Ness, potentially bowser (**** yeah bowser vs. MK on shadow moses XD) basically anyone that gets gayed out by MK gimping them, anyone who wins on extreme stages, and anyone who gets ***** on MK's CPs.

It would be the following:
-about as surgical as a LGL for MK only
-far more functional as far as stopping planking by MK
-would fix the whole "MK breaks the counterpick system" argument
-far more balancing

We could even weaken it to "MK still gets his counterpick and a stage ban, but the counterpick is limited to neutrals)

Hell, we wouldn't even need the LGL with this rule! Everyone just picks a stage against MK with no ledges!

 

[kackamee]

Hey, not just the LGL. If we're going to be surgically limiting MK, let's implement the "**** you MK stage rule", as I like to call it as well-MK's opponent gets to choose whatever stage they want on all matches against MK. Like, game one, MK vs. Snake. Snake chooses Shadow Moses Island. Game two, MK vs. Falco. Falco chooses Eldin. Game 3, MK vs. Sonic (or fox). Sonic chooses Temple Hyrule.

This way, there's no way in hell he'd be banned! I mean, look at all the bad/potentially bad matchups! Falco, Snake, ICs, possibly wario, maybe Marth, Sonic, maybe Ness, potentially bowser (**** yeah bowser vs. MK on shadow moses XD) basically anyone that gets gayed out by MK gimping them, anyone who wins on extreme stages, and anyone who gets ***** on MK's CPs.

It would be the following:
-about as surgical as a LGL for MK only
-far more functional as far as stopping planking by MK
-would fix the whole "MK breaks the counterpick system" argument
-far more balancing

We could even weaken it to "MK still gets his counterpick and a stage ban, but the counterpick is limited to neutrals)

Hell, we wouldn't even need the LGL with this rule! Everyone just picks a stage against MK with no ledges!

MK ***** at not getting grabbed. And even more so ***** at Shadow Moses Island. And Sonic on Temple wouldn't really do much either because the Sonic would be "stalling" if he just ran away. Falco vs. MK on Eldin is pretty legit but it'd still be even IMO due to Falco's CG not lasting forever.

 

[Pierce7d]

@ BPC

lol, that's like halfway a good idea. If only it wasn't so, ew.

 

[JRob]

^It makes just as much sense as LGLs do...

 

[kackamee]

Hey, not just the LGL. If we're going to be surgically limiting MK, let's implement the "**** you MK stage rule", as I like to call it as well-MK's opponent gets to choose whatever stage they want on all matches against MK. Like, game one, MK vs. Snake. Snake chooses Shadow Moses Island. Game two, MK vs. Falco. Falco chooses Eldin. Game 3, MK vs. Sonic (or fox). Sonic chooses Temple Hyrule.

This way, there's no way in hell he'd be banned! I mean, look at all the bad/potentially bad matchups! Falco, Snake, ICs, possibly wario, maybe Marth, Sonic, maybe Ness, potentially bowser (**** yeah bowser vs. MK on shadow moses XD) basically anyone that gets gayed out by MK gimping them, anyone who wins on extreme stages, and anyone who gets ***** on MK's CPs.

It would be the following:
-about as surgical as a LGL for MK only
-far more functional as far as stopping planking by MK
-would fix the whole "MK breaks the counterpick system" argument
-far more balancing

We could even weaken it to "MK still gets his counterpick and a stage ban, but the counterpick is limited to neutrals)

Hell, we wouldn't even need the LGL with this rule! Everyone just picks a stage against MK with no ledges!

Then...why were you so against my whole 'expiriment with new rules" thing.

Devil's advocate >.<

 

[Jdietz43]

I've been mulling over this idea in my mind, and think it may be a good intermediate step to a solution:

I'd like to see a tournament attempt two brackets, an MK ditto bracket, and a bracket for every other character. It's not ideal, but it alleviates the surgical changes we'd need to keep MK around while also letting people who have invested a considerable amount of effort into MK to continue using him if they choose. It's not a perfect solution, but it satisfies the pro ban players while still letting the MK's play against people who also turned to MK (which is preferable to not being able to play at all even if it's not ideal for them)

Anyone like to comment on this idea?

 

[salaboB]

Anyone like to comment on this idea?

I think it was posted in the wrong thread.

 

[Throwback]

not to mention it guarantees an MK in the final

 

[Dr. Tuen]

My friends and I discussed this issue. We can't come up with anything reasonable outside an MK ban.

I'm already practicing to pick up ZSS. I have an impending feeling that MK is seeing his last days.

That's just my current opinion.

--

On the topic of Planking. I know that tether recovery characters can ledge release faster. But does that give them more invincibility, or are they allotted less invincibility frames to begin with? I know they can only re-grab 3 times with the actual tether, but it would be useful to know for getting your opponent off you.

-Tuen

 

[J4pu]

they get less invincibility overall so that off-edge invincibility is the same