Remove Metaknight's ability to counterpick non-starter stages

[Kaffei]

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...

I agree with this. I played a bunch of people at a tourney and they all knew the MK match up and beat me a lot. I didn't feel like I had any real super advantage.

..Or maybe that's just because I suck lol

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

MK does have a big fat advantage at the highest level of play. The question is, by how much? Is that much really so banworthy? Compare to other games, where even the thought of banning a character who isn't winning and taking 2-5 in just about every tournament worth mentioning is going to get people screaming "SCRUUUUUB" at you (think Street Fighter 3, for example).

 

[demonictoonlink]

That is not a direct response to my question.

Fine. I'm not gonna look for the post, but have you ever heard m2k's reasoning on why MK is the only thing keeping this game fun? Basically he says that without him this game is just camping, infiniting, spamming and chaingrabbing. I'm not saying MK isn't guilty of any of these, but he's pretty much the only character that can get away with playing aggressively (in before some pro-ban kid brings up planking even though I already admitted MK was guilty of some of this)

I used to main Tink. You know that . I HATE doing nothing but throwing **** all game. I played Toon Link because I loved that character and the personality behind him in windwaker. I stuck with him because I was devoted, but I realized it's dumb to play a character I don't enjoy playing. I chose MK because he's how I wanted to play. I'm not saying MK isn't ridiculous, but he opens up a playstyle that a lot of people would quit this game without. It's a pretty big stretch to say that most people believe brawl would be a better game without him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvjGrWERM1U

 

[Zero_Saber]

BPC you made an earlier point that without MK the rest of the top tiers in Brawl are similar to melee balance. If you look at the match-up chart for Melee you will realize that isn't so. There are 2 characters in that game with no match-ups worse than 50-50 (Fox and Falco). Along with a total of 7 characters with no match-ups worse than 40:60 (Fox, Sheik, Marth, Falco, Puff, Peach, and Samus). Getting rid of MK makes there a total of 0 characters with no bad match-up's (so no Falco/Fox like characters). Characters with no worse match-up than 40:60 without MK would be Snake, Diddy, Marth, Wario, Lucario, Pit, amd Toon Link, with MK still in the game they would be MK, Snake, Diddy, Wario, Lucario, and Pit. This is with using only 1/2 the match-ups opinions. The only MK chart I could find (which is the last one they had before re-discussing now) ,T.L., and Marth were all 60:40 making them still in along with the addition of MK.

So a little re-cap with MK the number of chars with no match-ups worse than 50-50 is 1 in Brawl 2 in Melee. Characters with no worse than a 40:60 (with MK) is somewhere between 6 and 9 for Brawl and 7 in Melee. Removing MK makes it a 0-2 ratio on the no bad match-up's and a 7-7 split for the characters whose worst is a 40:60.

What we can take from this data is that removing MK barely if at all makes more characters viable like melee supposedly did and actually makes the top characters less similar to melee as there are no characters who have no bad match-ups.

Ok so now on to the main topic at hand if we should make M.K.'s ability to counterpick go bye bye and I think the obvious answer is no. Not only is it somewhat "unfair" to M.K. mains but it's completely unreasonable due to the fact that the boosts he gets on these stages (RC and Brinstar) aren't big enough to warrant such action. None of the stages are so good for him that he get's auto wins from versatile character (not I.C.'s etc.).

Now a question that if the answer to is no the rest of this paragraph is pointless. Does the opponent still get to ban a stage? If so then MK is nerfed to a really great extent. If it's a 5 stage list then MK get's the softest counter pick any character has ever had. If it's a 9 they can ban Frigate/Delfino (depending which one is on) and give MK a bunch of mediocre options (Halberd is one of his worst stages against anyone able to kill off the top). I understand that this is partially the point, but the magnitude of the change is so steep when you consider that there will be more good stages for certain chars to CP against MK while he can't even get a semi-decent counter pick going. I see no good reason for a character who only has 60-40 at best on 6 of the top 7 characters and 9-10 of the top 12 should be weakened. In a best of 5 , 7, or 9 this weakness gets even more exploitable due to him not being able to CP the stages he already won on.

In conclusion Brawl and Melee's top characters are not similar with or without MK. Taking away MK's ability to counterpick stages not only limits a character that doesn't need to be limited but also has the same artificial buffing system the 3 and 5 stage list has for limited characters like IC's and etc. (which I know you don't like).

P.S. Most of the "stages he still has" aren't very good for him. Norfair and Delfino are while Frigate is fairy neutral I think. PS2 is a nearly completely unexplored stage and as of now no characters seem to particularly like it or dislike it. GG's is outright bad for MK due to the ease of KOing off the ceiling and his lack of a projectile. Halberd also sucks due to the fact that he get's KO'd off the top easily (although in certain match-ups the sharking outweighs this).

 

[Spelt]

Compare to other games

Stop right there.
Just stop.
Brawl is a different game with a different community. Stop basing opinions off of what another community would do.
SF and other 2d fighters are about as comparable to brawl as halo is.

 

[AvaricePanda]

@ that long post.

i noticed you said ROB would have no worse than a 4-6 if MK was gone.

and I lol'd hard.

 

[Kaffei]

Fine. I'm not gonna look for the post, but have you ever heard m2k's reasoning on why MK is the only thing keeping this game fun? Basically he says that without him this game is just camping, infiniting, spamming and chaingrabbing. I'm not saying MK isn't guilty of any of these, but he's pretty much the only character that can get away with playing aggressively (in before some pro-ban kid brings up planking even though I already admitted MK was guilty of some of this)

I used to main Tink. You know that . I HATE doing nothing but throwing **** all game. I played Toon Link because I loved that character and the personality behind him in windwaker. I stuck with him because I was devoted, but I realized it's dumb to play a character I don't enjoy playing. I chose MK because he's how I wanted to play. I'm not saying MK isn't ridiculous, but he opens up a playstyle that a lot of people would quit this game without. It's a pretty big stretch to say that most people believe brawl would be a better game without him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvjGrWERM1U

That is the answer I was looking for

 

[Zero_Saber]

@ that long post.

i noticed you said ROB would have no worse than a 4-6 if MK was gone.

and I lol'd hard.

I was going solely on what was completed currently in match-up charts. I don't have all the chars match-ups known (I am pretty sure no one does) so that was about all I could do. What is that match-up 35-65?

Edit: Trusting your right and removing the R.O.B. parts.

 

[John12346]

I personally think watching 9999 matches involving MK every tourney has become quite stale

 

[Kaffei]

I personally think watching 9999 matches involving MK every tourney has become quite stale

No one said you had to watch them

 

[John12346]

No one said you had to watch them

Well, I still have to LISTEN to them. >.o

 

[Technodeath]

Could always block your ears.

 

[Sleek Media]

Fine. I'm not gonna look for the post, but have you ever heard m2k's reasoning on why MK is the only thing keeping this game fun? Basically he says that without him this game is just camping, infiniting, spamming and chaingrabbing. I'm not saying MK isn't guilty of any of these, but he's pretty much the only character that can get away with playing aggressively (in before some pro-ban kid brings up planking even though I already admitted MK was guilty of some of this)

Okay, let's talk about this. Before I start, though, I want to say that I have never seen M2K win a match with any other character than MK. I'd take any bet you offer that he wouldn't even win half his tournaments he currently does using another character, not even Snake. Someone who exclusively relies on MK suggesting that MK shouldn't be banned is meaningless.

...without him this game is just camping

M2K is confusing "camping" with "playing defense", something he doesn't have to do as MK.

...without him this game is just infiniting

Should also be banned. There's nothing competitive about infinites.

...without him this game is just spamming

Wow, talk about hypocrisy. Didn't stop him from throwing out about 50 tornados on Brinstar in his match against Ally at the MLG tournament. Very few characters have truly spammable moves, and most of them have counters.

...without him this game is just chaingrabbing

There should be a three-grab limit on chaingrabs. Again, there's nothing competitive or skillful about it; it's just another exploit the players found that is boring to watch and easy to abuse.


Guys, you're missing the point of competitive play here. Competitive play is supposed to be entertaining. That means it's fun to play, and fun to watch. Variety and surprises create excitement. The "metagame" has gone in the completely opposite direction, and that's why it's so **** stale.

Everyone agrees that they are sick of:
- seeing MK too often in tournaments
- seeing MK win WAY too often in tournaments with any sort of developed metagame
- dealing with MKs brokenness, which includes his abusive offensive powers, ridiculous offstage game, near-guarunteed counterpick wins, and complete lack of counters

The vast majority of people who are against banning MK play as him. Does anyone see the problem with that?

The solution is pretty obvious. Ban MK, and you get an entirely new game where the tiers are ruined (which means we can all play who we WANT to be instead of who we SHOULD be), more stages are viable for competitive play, and player interest is expanded and renewed.

 

[Zero_Saber]

The solution is pretty obvious. Ban MK, and you get an entirely new game where the tiers are ruined (which means we can all play who we WANT to be instead of who we SHOULD be), more stages are viable for competitive play, and player interest is expanded and renewed.

Banning MK turns very few characters viable that aren't already viable. Going based on the match-up charts for the individual character (not MK) he brings 2 characters from 40:60's or better to 35:65, but with both of those 2 (Marth and Toon Link) MK's old match-up chart has them as 60-40's. The only thing it will do is push MK mains off the game and make the community die.

 

[rPSIvysaur]

Wow, talk about hypocrisy. Didn't stop him from throwing out about 50 tornados on Brinstar in his match against Ally at the MLG tournament. Very few characters have truly spammable moves, and most of them have counters.

No. M2K was getting legitimate reads and capitalized them by using tornado.
It's nearly the same as being tech chased over and over again by Snake's d-throw. It's like Snake's d-throw is truly spammable!

There should be a three-grab limit on chaingrabs. Again, there's nothing competitive or skillful about it; it's just another exploit the players found that is boring to watch and easy to abuse.

lolwut? That's simply not happening. Surgically nerfing one character because they can get a large damage input via getting a read and performing a repetition of moves is scrubby.

Guys, you're missing the point of competitive play here. Competitive play is supposed to be entertaining. That means it's fun to play, and fun to watch. Variety and surprises create excitement. The "metagame" has gone in the completely opposite direction, and that's why it's so **** stale.

That's not the definition of competitive play. Competitive play is where two players compete. When competing, the player tries to utilize the best techniques and actions to win. I'm sorry you don't enjoy watching people time each other out as much as I do.

The solution is pretty obvious. Ban MK, and you get an entirely new game where the tiers are ruined (which means we can all play who we WANT to be instead of who we SHOULD be), more stages are viable for competitive play, and player interest is expanded and renewed.

I'd like that to happen, but this isn't a ban MK thread. Now I'd suggest this thread gets back on topic about the idea and application of surgical nerfs as a compromise for the pro-ban and anti-ban coalitionists.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Stop right there.
Just stop.
Brawl is a different game with a different community. Stop basing opinions off of what another community would do.
SF and other 2d fighters are about as comparable to brawl as halo is.

So why don't Sirlin's principles of competitive gaming still apply? Why shouldn't we wait until the kind of domination Akuma had in HDRemix (not the super-broken one, but the one that was nerfed hard and still broken) shows up? Sirlin's principles aren't SF-exclusive.

And let's not turn this into a ban MK thing. The point of this is that instead of banning stages, we should just make MK unable to counterpick them. That's all.

 

[Jack Kieser]

YES THEY ARE STOP IT BPC WE'RE A DIFFERENT COMMUNITY, ASDHASFDFKLHSDFKL!!!

...*ahem* Yeah, seriously, though, they still apply to us.

 

[Mr.-0]

Wouldn't this count as something related to the ruleset?

 

[demonictoonlink]

Insanely scrubby stuff

That stuff was insanely scrubby.

 

[Sleek Media]

No. M2K was getting legitimate reads and capitalized them by using tornado. It's nearly the same as being tech chased over and over again by Snake's d-throw. It's like Snake's d-throw is truly spammable!

You are so kind. I consider five or six tornadoes every ten seconds to be spammy, but whatever. I'm not here to dispute that.

I'd like that to happen, but this isn't a ban MK thread. Now I'd suggest this thread gets back on topic about the idea and application of surgical nerfs as a compromise for the pro-ban and anti-ban coalitionists.

You guys can discuss it all you want, but "surgical nerfs" definitely aren't gonna happen. A ban also won't get approved by the tightwads on this board. If you wanna fix the MK situation, just expirament with rules/bans at your own tournaments and let them speak for themselves. When you get a better turnout and more interesting results shove it in everyone's face, and then laugh when they stop telling you to post scrubby stuff.

 

[John12346]

Guys, you're missing the point of competitive play here. Competitive play is supposed to be entertaining. That means it's fun to play, and fun to watch. Variety and surprises create excitement. The "metagame" has gone in the completely opposite direction, and that's why it's so **** stale.

Everyone agrees that they are sick of:
- seeing MK too often in tournaments
- seeing MK win WAY too often in tournaments with any sort of developed metagame
- dealing with MKs brokenness, which includes his abusive offensive powers, ridiculous offstage game, near-guarunteed counterpick wins, and complete lack of counters

The vast majority of people who are against banning MK play as him. Does anyone see the problem with that?

Actually, DTL, I think these were some pretty good points

 

[Kaffei]

Okay, let's talk about this. Before I start, though, I want to say that I have never seen M2K win a match with any other character than MK. I'd take any bet you offer that he wouldn't even win half his tournaments he currently does using another character, not even Snake. Someone who exclusively relies on MK suggesting that MK shouldn't be banned is meaningless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fxwgKdJS4k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7JOKD_f_ww
Apparently you now have a stance stating that MK should be banned because an extremely smart player who practices and knows everything about a character places top. Let's just ban Mango now.

M2K is confusing "camping" with "playing defense", something he doesn't have to do as MK.

This post just makes you look even more dumb

Should also be banned. There's nothing competitive about infinites.

Most infinites have restrictions or are banned.

Wow, talk about hypocrisy. Didn't stop him from throwing out about 50 tornados on Brinstar in his match against Ally at the MLG tournament. Very few characters have truly spammable moves, and most of them have counters.

Why are you picking out just 1 match? Brinstar & Snake do not mesh at all. M2K took full advantage of the stage. Complaining about spamming just makes you look dumb, again.

There should be a three-grab limit on chaingrabs. Again, there's nothing competitive or skillful about it; it's just another exploit the players found that is boring to watch and easy to abuse.

Chain grabs are not a problem. They don't break the game, and you don't see ICs/DDD/Falcos/Pikachus taking top place all the time. inb4 Meta Knight

Guys, you're missing the point of competitive play here. Competitive play is supposed to be entertaining. That means it's fun to play, and fun to watch. Variety and surprises create excitement. The "metagame" has gone in the completely opposite direction, and that's why it's so **** stale.

Everyone agrees that they are sick of:
- seeing MK too often in tournaments
- seeing MK win WAY too often in tournaments with any sort of developed metagame
- dealing with MKs brokenness, which includes his abusive offensive powers, ridiculous offstage game, near-guarunteed counterpick wins, and complete lack of counters

The vast majority of people who are against banning MK play as him. Does anyone see the problem with that?

The solution is pretty obvious. Ban MK, and you get an entirely new game where the tiers are ruined (which means we can all play who we WANT to be instead of who we SHOULD be), more stages are viable for competitive play, and player interest is expanded and renewed.

Um, no. Competition is to win. Fun factor is definitely not ruled out but you are framing it as if tournaments are friendlies all around.
I am not sick of MK in tournaments, because he's a good character. Obviously top tiers are going to be picked. Just look at how many Foxes there are in Melee, yet 239482342423432 people still play Melee.

http://theviashino.com/ssbb/tournaments-2010-3.txt

According to this tournament results list, out of 88 tournaments, 44 of them were won by Meta Knight and 44 of them were won by a non Meta Knight. How the HELL is that MK always winning?? To add on, the tournament I went to last saturday was won by a Diddy Kong. That makes it 45.

Dealing with MK? Anyone who is not dumb knows how.

 

[John12346]

You can't deny that ONE character in a game of 37(Shiek and ZSS included) winning 50% of tournaments is a bit obscene, though...

 

[Spelt]

So why don't Sirlin's principles of competitive gaming still apply? Why shouldn't we wait until the kind of domination Akuma had in HDRemix (not the super-broken one, but the one that was nerfed hard and still broken) shows up? Sirlin's principles aren't SF-exclusive.

And let's not turn this into a ban MK thing. The point of this is that instead of banning stages, we should just make MK unable to counterpick them. That's all.

I never said we should disband competitive gaming mentality all together.

but using SF principles to decide how or when we ban someone in our game is like using stats for banned weapons in halo to determine how we ban stages or items.

I never said we should turn this into a ban mk thing, just saying that we should stop falling back on other communities to do the dirty work that we can't do because we're too busy arguing about every single theory.
It's ridiculous.


If there's something a large portion of our community would like to try, how about we stop theorycrafting how big of a mess it'll become and actually try it at a couple tournaments. Nothing's ever gonna be solved without real data....

 

[Kaffei]

You can't deny that ONE character in a game of 37(Shiek and ZSS included) winning 50% of tournaments is a bit obscene, though...

I do not find that obscene. Call me biased & dumb, that's just my opinion. It's the nature of top tier characters to me

 

[Sleek Media]

I do not find that obscene. Call me biased & dumb, that's just my opinion. It's the nature of top tier characters to me

You are biased and dumb, and when the next Smash comes out, and there is a character better than MK, you will be the first person the leave him for that character. You're just like all those weak Marth players back in Melee who jumped ship once they realized he was no longer the best in Brawl.

If you want to ***** out the tier list, be my guest - players like you always get beat anyway, but stop trying to sabotage anti-MK discussions. Your overwhelming bias convinces nobody.

 

[demonictoonlink]

Actually, DTL, I think these were some pretty good points

The first point: competitive play is supposed to be entertaining.

This is already untrue. Not gonna bother with the rest.

 

[John12346]

So video games are not supposed to be enjoyed.

Okay.

 

[link2702]

even in competitive gaming, a big portion is to try and have fun, its not to "lol win allz da moneyz all the tiem" cuz then everyone LITERALLY would be going metaknigth every single match(though ti is getting close to that bad) if you aren't having fun then there is no point in playing the game at all., competitively, casually, it does not matter, if you aren't finding any enjoyment/entertainment whatsoever in playing the game, then why the hell are you wasting your time playing it?

 

[Kaffei]

You are biased and dumb, and when the next Smash comes out, and there is a character better than MK, you will be the first person the leave him for that character. You're just like all those weak Marth players back in Melee who jumped ship once they realized he was no longer the best in Brawl.

If you want to ***** out the tier list, be my guest - players like you always get beat anyway, but stop trying to sabotage anti-MK discussions. Your overwhelming bias convinces nobody.

I don't like playing characters that suck, but that doesn't mean I jump to top tier immediately. In 64 I play Kirby because he's FUN TO ME and DOESN'T SUCK. Is he top tier? No. Pikachu is. I hate Pikachu because I don't like him as a character nor do I like his playstyle.
In Melee I play Sheik because she's FUN TO ME and DOESN'T SUCK. Is she top tier? No. Fox is. I hate Fox because I don't like space animals as a character and I don't like their move set.
In Brawl I play MK because he's FUN TO ME and DOESN'T SUCK. Is he top tier? He sure is, but that's not why I play him.

I never picked up Marth in Brawl because he is boring. I tried Marth in Melee for a couple weeks and then he got boring so I switched to Sheik.

You are just making DUMB assumptions and framing me as if I am some top tier man ***** while whining about MK with abysmal stances like "spamming is eww"

And I don't always get beat. Why are you even bringing that up that has nothing to do with MK

 

[AvaricePanda]

You are biased and dumb, and when the next Smash comes out, and there is a character better than MK, you will be the first person the leave him for that character. You're just like all those weak Marth players back in Melee who jumped ship once they realized he was no longer the best in Brawl.

If you want to ***** out the tier list, be my guest - players like you always get beat anyway, but stop trying to sabotage anti-MK discussions. Your overwhelming bias convinces nobody.

]I have never seen M2K win a match with any other character than MK.

lmfaaaaao.

On a serious note, you need to step back and look at what you said. Kaffei just said that he's fine with a character taking 50% of wins because that's not too uncommon for competitive fighters. That's an opinion that you can disagree with or agree with. Your large posts are not only filled with opinions, but also direct insults and adjectives that serve no purpose other than to overexaggerate. If Kaffei is biased, you are ten times more so.

I want you to tell me what exactly you mean by this statement.

You're just like all those weak Marth players back in Melee who jumped ship once they realized he was no longer the best in Brawl.

@John, the point isn't that video games shouldn't be enjoyed—that's kind of a leap from what DTL actually said/implied—the point is that you can't make rules on a competitive game on the basis of, "entertainment." Competitive games are supposed to be competitive, and entertainment just comes naturally from it. Defensive play and camping is usually viewed as boring, but you can't make a rule to say, "you must attack at least once every 10 seconds from close quarters," not only because it's ridiculous and unenforcable, but because it's unnecessary. While it's not as entertaining to watch, it's still a completely viable strategy that adds to the competitive depth of the game.

The other maybe more obvious thing is that everybody's view of what is entertaining is completely subjective. It's the reason why some people like/hate football and hate/like soccer, or why some people and not everybody likes videogames, or for more specific examples why some like Brawl vs. Melee, or why some people like seeing Snake vs. Diddy as compared to MK vs. Snake, or why some people use different characters in any competitive fighting game as opposed to everyone picking the best character.

edit: Does anyone have anything to say about the actual topic (MK not having the ability to CP counterpick stages)? I honestly feel like all that could be said about it has been said, and all that's happening is really dumb arguments/insults and this turning into an MK ban thread.

 

[John12346]

l@John, the point isn't that video games shouldn't be enjoyed—that's kind of a leap from what DTL actually said/implied—the point is that you can't make rules on a competitive game on the basis of, "entertainment." Competitive games are supposed to be competitive, and entertainment just comes naturally from it. Defensive play and camping is usually viewed as boring, but you can't make a rule to say, "you must attack at least once every 10 seconds from close quarters," not only because it's ridiculous and unenforcable, but because it's unnecessary. While it's not as entertaining to watch, it's still a completely viable strategy that adds to the competitive depth of the game.

Well, maybe it's restricted to just me, then, but there's something about watching MK win matches that just sorta drains the pep outta me at tournies...

 

[demonictoonlink]

Not gonna lie. You're reinforcing pro-ban stereo types hard. The whole putting words into other's mouths thing really needs to stop.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

You can't deny that ONE character in a game of 37(Shiek and ZSS included) winning 50% of tournaments is a bit obscene, though...

Look up some results for Street Fighter: Third Strike. You'd be surprised. Or MvC2, or Soul Calibur 4, or most fighting games. If you have 50% or less, that's usually pretty decent balance, honestly. Balancing a fighting game is hard as **** (I ****ing ran Brawl-, I know what I'm talking about when I say that).

I never said we should disband competitive gaming mentality all together.

but using SF principles to decide how or when we ban someone in our game is like using stats for banned weapons in halo to determine how we ban stages or items.

I never suggested that. I'm saying that if we apply the same principles, 50% is not that bad! And additionally, it could be that we're wrong, and some other character turns out to be an MK counter. Look at melee. People thought jiggs was on the level with ICs and Peach (mid-high tier), and then Hungrybox and Mang0 show up out of nowhere and start winning literally every national with Jiggs. Completely unrelated great quote, "Watching HB play is like watching paint back air".

What principles do we use? If we ban something because it takes 50%, what kind of precedent are we setting? A far more loose one than almost any other competitive game ever. This is not a good precedent to set. If we were to use that measure, then yeah, Snake probably would become the next metaknight, in that he'd become banworthy because he would win about half the tournaments (he's pretty **** far ahead of diddy). Not saying Snake is anywhere near MK's level.

I never said we should turn this into a ban mk thing, just saying that we should stop falling back on other communities to do the dirty work that we can't do because we're too busy arguing about every single theory.
It's ridiculous.


If there's something a large portion of our community would like to try, how about we stop theorycrafting how big of a mess it'll become and actually try it at a couple tournaments. Nothing's ever gonna be solved without real data....

Amen to this. However, a couple of little tournaments running this **** is not good testing. At all. We need top-level play and quite a few tournaments. I'm talking regional or national here.

 

[iRJi]

The first point: competitive play is supposed to be entertaining.

This is already untrue. Not gonna bother with the rest.

I think this post actually contradicts one of your earlier posts, iirc. To lazy to search it right now though. Ill do it a bit later in the day. Just wanted to bring that to your attention just in case i'm right.

Look up some results for Street Fighter: Third Strike. You'd be surprised. Or MvC2, or Soul Calibur 4, or most fighting games. If you have 50% or less, that's usually pretty decent balance, honestly. Balancing a fighting game is hard as **** (I ****ing ran Brawl-, I know what I'm talking about when I say that).

Also, comparing brawl standings to fighters such as SF and MvC (ESP no. 2) is no good. This game is completely different in physics, therefore should be viewed different in standings as well.

I am not here to actually argue, rather just point out the truth and lay it on the table.

 

[solecalibur]

So video games are not supposed to be enjoyed.

Okay.

The point people are trying to put across is , if its beatable its allowed , if its not its banned , in some cases while your playing locally people might get angry you edge guard someone because its "unfair" but its beatable and not game breaking


also did anyone answer my reply you need to game 1 to win the set?

 

[John12346]

Okay, then do you mind telling me what you meant when you said

competitive play is supposed to be entertaining.

This is already untrue.

The entire subject confuses me because whenever I see people watch a tournament match involving MK, there's always plenty of cheering whenever the non-MK wins.

When the MK wins through his Dsmash/gimp/UpB, everyone's like, "Oh."

 

[Jack Kieser]

What he means is that there are plenty of competitive games that aren't heart-stopping adrenaline-fests. Not many people consider Chess to be "entertaining". Chess, however boring to watch, is still a competitive game. Smash can be competitive, regardless of how entertaining it is, because the only criterion for something to be considered "competitive" is that two or more people want to see who's the best at a given thing.

 

[Spelt]

What principles do we use? If we ban something because it takes 50%, what kind of precedent are we setting?

now we're saying other communities should listen to us, which is just as untrue as the opposite.

A far more loose one than almost any other competitive game ever.

How so? Where are the other statistics about other ban worthy characters?
I've never seen any proof of HD remix akuma actually being broken, and the only thread i saw bring it up got laughed off by the majority of the community.
I haven't seen any tournament results expressing akuma's dominance either.

This is not a good precedent to set. If we were to use that measure, then yeah, Snake probably would become the next metaknight, in that he'd become banworthy because he would win about half the tournaments (he's pretty **** far ahead of diddy). Not saying Snake is anywhere near MK's level.

I'm poking at the blind here, buuuuuuuut snake has counters. maybe not hard counters but better than the matches people consider counters against mk.

Also, comparing brawl standings to fighters such as SF and MvC (ESP no. 2) is no good. This game is completely different in physics, therefore should be viewed different in standings as well.

This.

 

[John12346]

Yeah Snake will still be pretty good, but he won't be banworthy. The reason why he's got good tournament percentages is that he does pretty well against MK, so he's able to stand through MK infested brackets that lack his own counters significantly better than other characters.