Remove Metaknight's ability to counterpick non-starter stages

[vato_break]

Let's play with handicap on!

 

[ADHD]

I just took an hour to write a whole ****ing wall of text but it was deleted because the page changed. Get ***** wyatt. I'm not doing it again either I have a life, so w/e. You win BPC. There is no piont in arguing if I cannot change the stages no matter how well I set-up points.

 

[Ussi]

Whenever i make a post on a new page... it just goes to the new page with my post.

On topic: I'd rather this idea than having stages be banned... I like RC and Brinstar

 

[ADHD]

Whenever i make a post on a new page... it just goes to the new page with my post.

On topic: I'd rather this idea than having stages be banned... I like RC and Brinstar

This has never happened to me before so I assume that it's because I changed my pages to seeing 20 posts per page.

 

[san.]

Well, all I can say is to get Lazarus if you use firefox, so you won't ever lose any post.

After reading the topic, I still haven't seen many comments on whether the guy who gets counterpicked is able to use MK. Only thing I can think of that goes with the rules stated by the TC is that if one counterpicks a CP, and the other person goes MK, then the person who CPd can also go MK.

I think there may be better ways to deal with this, but I could see this used as a last resort for those who want to actually ban some of those stages. Personally, I'm fine with them even with MK.

 

[John12346]

Actually, I had suggested a rule on the matter a long time ago:

MK CP Restriction Rule: If a player uses Meta-Knight on the first match of a set, they may not strike stages, and the opponent may choose the starting stage. If a player uses Meta-Knight in any match of the set, they may not ban any stages for the set. Adversely, if a player bans a stage, they may not use Meta-Knight for the rest of the set. If the loser of a match switches to Meta-Knight, they may only counterpick a starter stage. If both players use Meta-Knight for the first match, all restrictions stated above will be ignored for the set.

It places a much heavier restriction on MK rather than the one set by the OP, in case you didn't notice, but it does cover every case of a match that could possibly involve Meta-Knight.

I'm completely against putting a restriction like this on MK at this point, though, because if he's really messed up to receive such a restriction, he should just be flat out removed from the game.

 

[Orion*]

OS is the 10th-highest ranked MK. I was pretty sure AZ was up there among the high-level diddies and TOs.

What we need, though, are the really big players testing these stages and trying to figure out if they really are that banworthy.

lol at rankings meaning something >_>

OS would be unranked or bottom in any good state. the fact that a player at his level makes money is depressing. getting tournament placings in states that are easy doesnt mean as much as someplace like FL/socal/NjNy/TX

AZ is also pretty garbz in comparison to a Top player.

you are looking at placings that literally, in a comparison of skill dont matter.

 

[fkacyan]

I agree with this idea, seeing as liberal stagelists put some of his best CPs in the neutral list anyways.

 

[ぱみゅ]

As I said before, I'd use this idea, but not only for limit MK.
For example, I'd allow Mario Circuit and ban it for DDD/Falco/ICs.

But w/e, my "ideal liberal stagelist" have 25 stages on it.

 

[Judo777]

lol at rankings meaning something >_>

OS would be unranked or bottom in any good state. the fact that a player at his level makes money is depressing. getting tournament placings in states that are easy doesnt mean as much as someplace like FL/socal/NjNy/TX

AZ is also pretty garbz in comparison to a Top player.

you are looking at placings that literally, in a comparison of skill dont matter.

Have u ever played OS or AZ? Cause if not then how are u arguing anything? How many times have you been to a smash tournament in Kentucky, Ohio, or Indiana? If ur answer is less than 5 then why is anyone listening to you?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I just took an hour to write a whole ****ing wall of text but it was deleted because the page changed. Get ***** wyatt. I'm not doing it again either I have a life, so w/e. You win BPC. There is no piont in arguing if I cannot change the stages no matter how well I set-up points.

I wouldn't put it past you to say something like that. However, your arguments really don't make much sense, and scream, "I don't want to adapt". If brawl is a deeper, more competitive game when you add the factor of "fighting the stage", then why isn't this the norm? If brawl would be a deeper, more competitive game if we played 2-minute coin matches with all items on high (hypothetical example, obviously not the case), would you be against that?

 

[Veel]

Can we skip to the ultimate conclusion of this thread? This rule won't gain popularity as it blatantly aimed at MK and the next logical step is not to set up additional restrictions on him; it is to ban him. Either enough people move towards banning him and it happens or enough people do not and it does not happen. This rule is akin to a middle group movement and people do not like to compromise so this probably isn't going anywhere.

Besides why would you need to limit MK when snake is clearly better and Yoshi has a 65-35 advantage on MK, I mean common guyz.

 

[ぱみゅ]

Only conclusion I can have of this and every other idea, is that most people just won't listen any of them. Ever.

 

[teluoborg]

Conclusion is in the second post of this topic :

If Metaknight really needed such a rule, he would be ban-worthy.

If MK needed a specific rule he would be banworthy.
But he isn't banned, hence he doesn't need any specific rule.

Flawless logic. End of discussion.

Note that it can be used to answer (and discredit) any MK specific suggestion.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Conclusion is in the second post of this topic :

If MK needed a specific rule he would be banworthy.
Because there are many specific rules obviously made for MK, he is banworthy.

Flawless logic. End of discussion.

Note that it can be used to answer (and discredit) any suggestion that MK isn't bannable.

Fixed that for ya.

Get at me. ^_-

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

MK isn't bannable because too many people main MK, and MK-banned-tournaments would lose a lot of money.

 

[John12346]

That's not entirely true. Most MK mains are people who discarded their original mains who they could use at an acceptable level of play. With MK out of the picture, a lot of MK mains actually have a character to fall back to.

I can think of 5 people in NY right off the top of my head who fit that criteria.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yes, but why would they want to switch back? Say someone runs an MK-banned tournament in the region. Then this other guy thinks, "I want this tournament to fail" and runs an MK-legal tournament on the same weekend, in a similar locale. What happens? Well, all the MKs go to the MK legal tournament. Then the people who would've gone to the MK-banned tournament look and say, "oh, half the community is going to that tournament, including the best in our region, this tournament will not be as good" and proceed to go to the MK-legal tournament. Or, if they don't, sooner or later one kicks the bucket because neither is big enough to support itself as a regional.

 

[AlphaZealot]

AZ is also pretty garbz in comparison to a Top player.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1wQDBqUXdU vs m2k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpvCpHtgje4 vs ally
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6XQV8h4f1o vs Dojo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXW_-kmA3ww vs Anther
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8bwwiSdjSg vs lain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sVbPhFjGro vs Snakeee (in his prime)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQmORsmNzFo vs Meep (just as he entered his prime)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xov-oPcmagE vs Fatal
*Just for Jersey*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IatXZM2HL54 vs Pierce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3RkOENAPTI vs Cable

Aside from the close loses to Dojo/Ally I'm showcasing here, all these other games are wins. I don't think I'm "garbz" in comparison, but feel free to watch and judge for yourself. Granted, I'm not the absolute best Diddy (Gnes/ADHD are better and maybe Felix/NL/Flip), but I hope you aren't suggesting a ruleset be crafted based on 1 or 2 players alone.

 

[Spelt]

lol.
m2k vs diddy.

 

[AlphaZealot]

diddys to have taken a game from m2k: adhd/gnes/nl/me...and I think that is it? And how many people have ever even taken a game from m2k? I believe the club stands at less than 15-20 people.

I'm not as good comparatively as I once was but I should return to practice form soon. Recently I dropped to 5th on the Ohio PR .

Anyways, I'll stand by what I said earlier: there is no sense in limiting the stage list just for MK because regardless of how the stage list is crafted MK will be guaranteed the advantage in every game of the set, or at worst 2 of the 3 games in a 3 game set and that is extremely debatable since MK will always ban that one stage where the match is closest to in the opponents favor (but still not). Example: Diddy on FD - this will never be played in tournament.

 

[So Fatal]

Wow who the hell said AZ is not a top player, he is nasty.

 

[PMC66]

Arbitrary and surgical. This is a bad idea. If Metaknight really needed such a rule, he would be ban-worthy.

Umm he is bannable, In street fighter2 turbo Akuma was banned because of the teleport. Yet Meta Knight infinite cape glitch makes this look like a non stalling technique. Ok this is my point the street fighter guys banned Akuma for two reasons one his ariel fire balls and two his ability to teleport. Meta Knight has more than just 2 reasons to be banned. One his planking is unbeatable for some characters 2 the cape glitch 3 he is guaranteed to get back on the stage with the right method no other character in brawl has this. 4 he has the most priority in the entire game I would go as far as to argue that Meta Knight takes no form of tactics whatsoever and you could just be agressive the entire time, other characters require some form of though. ok i know MK has certain ways of combatting matchups for different characters like everyone else in brawl but really he is too easy to learn it's possible to be aggressive the entire time.

This is my opinion: I hate this current stage list with a **** passion the first one which allowed a variety of stages like Luigi's mansion, Distant planet Pirate ship they test certain skills and knowledge of those individual stages I like having counter pick stages. Though I think this current stage list is just dumb i'd rather have nothing but neutrals because right now it seemed to benefit meta Knight even more that and this is smash bros stage variety is a good thing.

to sum up if it were me old stage list, every stage allowed, or only neutrals.

 

[CR4SH]

If the character needs special rules to be viable, the character is not viable. Enough said.

 

[Juushichi]

Wow who the hell said AZ is not a top player, he is nasty.

See:

lol at rankings meaning something >_>

OS would be unranked or bottom in any good state. the fact that a player at his level makes money is depressing. getting tournament placings in states that are easy doesnt mean as much as someplace like FL/socal/NjNy/TX

AZ is also pretty garbz in comparison to a Top player.

you are looking at placings that literally, in a comparison of skill dont matter.

Here you go, Fatal. Just the usual "MW sucks, they wouldn't place in other regions" thing.

 

[ぱみゅ]

If the character needs special rules to be viable, the character is not viable. Enough said.

Problem is that he is still viable. He's just VERY good, but beatable.

I support this just because I REALLY hate Rainbow Cruise because it's used just to stall timer (and I love Norfair enough to wanting it being used).

 

[John12346]

Yes, but why would they want to switch back? Say someone runs an MK-banned tournament in the region. Then this other guy thinks, "I want this tournament to fail" and runs an MK-legal tournament on the same weekend, in a similar locale. What happens? Well, all the MKs go to the MK legal tournament. Then the people who would've gone to the MK-banned tournament look and say, "oh, half the community is going to that tournament, including the best in our region, this tournament will not be as good" and proceed to go to the MK-legal tournament. Or, if they don't, sooner or later one kicks the bucket because neither is big enough to support itself as a regional.

Well, I was just referring to if MK was perma/temp-banned, almost the entire community already has a character they can switch to at a competitive level.

It's already a given that MK-banned tournaments while MK isn't banned won't work too well...

 

[napZzz]

If the character needs special rules to be viable, the character is not viable. Enough said.

you beat me to it

whether or not he's not quite "bannable material", getting rid of him would be very healthy for brawl in general.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

If you want to make a surgical change then you need to analyze all of the effects that take place, not just one.

 

[Padô]

I don't really understand the "surgical" point, honestly and lately, all decisions taken by every single tournament organization, the BrawlBackRoom or MLG has been focused on MetaKnight directly or indirectly. And many ways have been put on practice to, lets say, "balance" the game: more restrict stage lists, ledgegrab limits ("Oh no this is not only about MK". Oh yea? You got planked by a Jigglypuff?), extended starter stages list, more strikes given to players and etc.

I'm just afraid of where are we heading to, every decision we make, every step we take is thinking on how MK can get used to this and abuse the hell out those new rules/restrictions, in fact, every decision we take has been overcame by the Metaknight players incredibly FAST, and thus have been proven along those years.

 

[FelixTrix]

diddys to have taken a game from m2k: adhd/gnes/nl/me...and I think that is it? And how many people have ever even taken a game from m2k? I believe the club stands at less than 15-20 people.

I'm not as good comparatively as I once was but I should return to practice form soon. Recently I dropped to 5th on the Ohio PR .

Anyways, I'll stand by what I said earlier: there is no sense in limiting the stage list just for MK because regardless of how the stage list is crafted MK will be guaranteed the advantage in every game of the set, or at worst 2 of the 3 games in a 3 game set and that is extremely debatable since MK will always ban that one stage where the match is closest to in the opponents favor (but still not). Example: Diddy on FD - this will never be played in tournament.

i've taken a game from m2k in a $5 mm. >_> 1-3. 2 stock get at me

 

[Jebril]

Here you go, Fatal. Just the usual "MW sucks, they wouldn't place in other regions" thing.

I'm reading this like you disagree which disturbs me. There's a reason why none of your players rank at national tournies.

 

[Sleek Media]

Explain to me again why MK isn't banned? Everyone knows he's clearly broken. Alot of people using him is not a justification.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Because he's not obviously broken to the extent where the game would obviously to any observer with half a brain be better without him. Banning him in such a state is scrubby. Give it another 5-10 years, and who knows what'll happen. I mean, it took melee 10 years to figure out "holy ****ing ****bags jiggs is a ****ing monster!".

 

[Kaffei]

BPC, not that I support banning MK, but wouldn't most people agree that the game would be better if MK was banned?

 

[demonictoonlink]

No.

The game would be better if MK was never in it. Not if he was banned.

 

[Kaffei]

That is not a direct response to my question.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

BPC, not that I support banning MK, but wouldn't most people agree that the game would be better if MK was banned?

A majority, perhaps, but I have revised my stance on metaknight somewhat. I've gone a lot deeper into the sirlin-style teachings (part of my big push to "stop banning stages you stupid scrubs"). And honestly, is MK really obviously that bad? Doesn't seem like it. Look at the very top tournament results (yes, I mean MLG, and probably soon apex)-not that much MK...

 

[sunshade]

Yes most people would agree however most people would agree to a lot of things.

 

[Tomato]

I don't think people should have to deal with restrictions just because they like playing Meta-Knight. I mean, it should just be encouraged that people should generally make an honest effort to use other characters, since as M2K said in his interview, the character developed much faster than the others have been. Telling people that they simply cannot play as MK is unfair, but it should be encouraged to not use MK, without having to tailor the rules to attempt to fabricate some sort of disadvantage, or at least less of an advantage for him.

MK players just need to be more socially responsible. The issue of his dominance stops when people actually try out other characters & attempt to get good with them. The tier list's clear worship for him, giving him his own elusive tier, is definitely attention grabbing for anyone who likes Smash looking to make a quick buck. Why learn a character that is clearly not as good, when MK's in a league of his own? And since so many people find themselves losing to MKs, people start to play him as well, in order to stay in the competition. I mean, it makes sense - How many people who main characters in the lower tiers are there? I mean, the higher tier characters are much more prevalent in the metagame, because almost everyone is using them.

All in all, I don't think any sort of ban or restriction is necessary, but it should be encouraged to use other characters, which is probably ultimately ineffective when people want to make easy money. No one wants to by the MLK Jr. of Smash.

"I have a dream... That all characters of any tier can win tournaments... With equal representation around the world..."

But yeah, don't force these bans on people. The less rules the better.