Should Metaknight be Banned? **Take 2** (Post-podcast)

[Master Raven]

yes, He Does

snake Doesn't Counter Mk.

Not This **** Again

 

[Advance]

I don't really think he should be banned, I mean, he's not actually a 'cheap' character per-se, but he's just really fast. You can't ban someone for being top tier.

Every character CAN be used cheaply, so I'd vote to leave him.

 

[Overswarm]

Yes, he does

no he doesn't

 

[arch knight]

anyone can counter mk you need to know the players weaknesses.
such as are they a strong air fighter do they shield often run alot.. there are many ways to beat mk

no one is unbeatable

 

[Jigglymaster]

If Peach and ICs didn't exist as well, yes.

Don't forget about Jigglypuff.

We all know what mango did against M2k's Fox.

Made M2k go Jigglypuff in the last match.

 

[Overswarm]

Arch knight, that's not countering the character. That's countering the player.

No one has natural tendencies that overcome Metaknight's natural advantages. A few have some things that do decently, but it is a matter of who gets ***** LESS by Metaknight, not who counters him.

 

[Overswarm]

Don't forget about Jigglypuff.

We all know what mango did.

And just Mango.

 

[arch knight]

Arch knight, that's not countering the character. That's countering the player.

No one has natural tendencies that overcome Metaknight's natural advantages. A few have some things that do decently, but it is a matter of who gets ***** LESS by Metaknight, not who counters him.

i totally agree with you but isnt it up to the player to know how to use meta the player is in control not the character so yeah you kinda do need to know how to counter the player in some shape or form

 

[Jigglymaster]

Comparing MK to Melee fox is just stupid.

If MK was in Melee and still had brawl's physics and his attacks would still be like they are in brawl with no hit stun MK would still be undobutly the best character in Melee.

 

[Ulevo]

Edit: Incorrect quote.

 

[Overswarm]

i totally agree with you but isnt it up to the player to know how to use meta the player is in control not the character so yeah you kinda do need to know how to counter the player in some shape or form

This is why I was able to beat MKs with ROB even though MK shouldn't ever really lose to ROB. Human error happens.

 

[arch knight]

ulevo is right about snake being higher than mk but i dont think mk is broken....

 

[arch knight]

This is why I was able to beat MKs with ROB even though MK shouldn't ever really lose to ROB. Human error happens.

thats right so it doesnt matter if your vsing mk or not no one is unbeatable i mean yeah it might a few tries but if they keep using the same spamming move over and over eventually you will find ways around it and out of it

 

[aeghrur]

Snake does not deserve to be higher on the tier list than MK, this is agreed upon.
Snake might soft-counter MK, go neutral with him, or be soft-countered by MK. No conclusive decision yet.
No one said MK can't be beaten. Obviously he can be beaten. >_>
Happy Steaksgiving.

 

[Nic64]

Snake doesn't counter MK.

Yes, he does

no he doesn't

I know you are but what am I

 

[Overswarm]

I know you are but what am I

I'm rubber you're glue.

You get kids high.

I'm calling the police.

 

[The Milk Monster]

I'm rubber you're glue.

You get kids high.

I'm calling the police.

You got him good Nic, haha.

 

[The Milk Monster]

thats right so it doesnt matter if your vsing mk or not no one is unbeatable i mean yeah it might a few tries but if they keep using the same spamming move over and over eventually you will find ways around it and out of it

Most of the competitive players won't spam the same move over again.

 

[da K.I.D.]

this is why the argument bugs me sometimes,

any thing that relates to the player in this issue can apply to MK just as well.

space better: the MK can do that too.

get better timing: the MK can do that too

learn to bait and punish: the MK can do that too

get better: the MK can do that too

learn how to get around his moves and spam:

when it comes to the person behind the controller the MK can do anything you can do but better.

pretend the player playing MK is you and you are fighting your self

MK down smashes 3 times in a row the first 2 knock you back to far to counter attack and the third hits you. being the observational person you are you say hes going to d smash 3 times in a row so next time after the second down smash you jump over it and hit him with a back air.
you are now the MK. you say i down smashed 3 times and he jumped over the third and back aired me. so the next time you down smash two times and knowing that he wil jump over the third, after the 2nd, you jump up and up air the other guy twice into a shuttle loop and procede to gimp him off the ledge.

thats why MK is so good, he has all the options covered and as soon as you find a counter to his action, he finds a counter counter that ***** you harder than the original move.

thats why OS stopped playing ROB, he analysed the matchup to the point where he knew that MK would always have all his options covered, whether the person behind the controller knew it or not.

 

[arch knight]

this is why the argument bugs me sometimes,

any thing that relates to the player in this issue can apply to MK just as well.

space better: the MK can do that too.

get better timing: the MK can do that too

learn to bait and punish: the MK can do that too

get better: the MK can do that too

learn how to get around his moves and spam:

when it comes to the person behind the controller the MK can do anything you can do but better.

pretend the player playing MK is you and you are fighting your self

MK down smashes 3 times in a row the first 2 knock you back to far to counter attack and the third hits you. being the observational person you are you say hes going to d smash 3 times in a row so next time after the second down smash you jump over it and hit him with a back air.
you are now the MK. you say i down smashed 3 times and he jumped over the third and back aired me. so the next time you down smash two times and knowing that he wil jump over the third, after the 2nd, you jump up and up air the other guy twice into a shuttle loop and procede to gimp him off the ledge.

thats why MK is so good, he has all the options covered and as soon as you find a counter to his action, he finds a counter counter that ***** you harder than the original move.

thats why OS stopped playing ROB, he analysed the matchup to the point where he knew that MK would always have all his options covered, whether the person behind the controller knew it or not.

the mk is only as good as the player like a game of chess you need to plan ahead to beat the king. but even then moves arent always predictable

 

[da K.I.D.]

the mk is only as good as the player like a game of chess you need to plan ahead to beat the king. but even then moves arent always predictable

MK is the only character that i think fits in this description.

its true, if the player is better than everybody else, the MK will not lose
such is not the case for every other character

 

[arch knight]

MK is the only character that i think fits in this description.

its true, if the player is better than everybody else, the MK will not lose
such is not the case for every other character

exactally therefore to get back on topic mk shouldnt be banned because the player controls the actions and movements all you need to do is plan out how you will play defensive offensive balanced what ever gets you pass and through metas use it and find new unpredictable ways to get the jump on him use the enviroment to your advantage

 

[brinboy789]

he isnt, and probably will never be unless something completely revolutionary is discovered

 

[da K.I.D.]

so MK shouldn't be banned because
1. humans are imperfect and
2. everyone can (supposedly) pick snake.

medoinitrite?

 

[Fletch]

exactally therefore to get back on topic mk shouldnt be banned because the player controls the actions and movements all you need to do is plan out how you will play defensive offensive balanced what ever gets you pass and through metas use it and find new unpredictable ways to get the jump on him use the enviroment to your advantage

So by this statement, Akuma should have never been banned either.

 

[Anther]

wtf guys. Pick a character that is tournament viable.
Be as good as your MK opponent or better. You might win you might lose, rarely do I hear of the better players losing unless they made an unfortunate mistake in a tournament match. Look for multiple ways to punish him, apply. I don't see the problem.
Everything he does is punishable to some degree, just as much as any other decent character in the game.

its true, if the player is better than everybody else, the MK will not lose
such is not the case for every other character

Why is that a problem x_X?, and it's the case for a good portion of the good characters in the game.

 

[Atomsk_92]

Anther most people in here are dumb and will never learn so just stop, most of us did a while ago XD

 

[Anther]

MK down smashes 3 times in a row the first 2 knock you back to far to counter attack and the third hits you. being the observational person you are you say hes going to d smash 3 times in a row so next time after the second down smash you jump over it and hit him with a back air.
you are now the MK. you say i down smashed 3 times and he jumped over the third and back aired me. so the next time you down smash two times and knowing that he wil jump over the third, after the 2nd, you jump up and up air the other guy twice into a shuttle loop and procede to gimp him off the ledge.

thats why MK is so good, he has all the options covered and as soon as you find a counter to his action, he finds a counter counter that ***** you harder than the original move.

And what's the problem with having multiple counters? I don't think good players pick them in such a way that you do one counter until it gets countered. Dsmashing twice in a row should get grabbed. SH aerial isn't your only option. Most of MK's offense is countered by quick OOS options. It's the whole getting cornered by him thing that's the true problem if it is one. Not a one of his shallow attack sequences are broken. Not one of them has one counter that's easily countered by MK.
SIGH. lol >_>.

 

[∫unk]

Not really; the core of this discussion is whether MK should be banned or not, not what the SBR is doing. While the SBR merely feels that MK should not be banned at this time, it has no governing power over any TO. Think of it as a combined opinion on the matter, albeit by a group of some of the more experienced players/TOs/mods/etc. The only thing the SBR did was make a suggestion, based on actual evidence rather than any ideology.

As I'm sure you're aware, SBR's decision affects TO's even if they have no actual governing power. Especially smaller local tournaments are heavily affected by SBR's rulesets from what I've experienced.

And this is exactly where I would disagree. Since most SBR members are not elite brawl players or consistent TOs how would they base anything off experience. Seems they are going by what other members of SBR are laying out for them or by theorycrafting.

The SBR is made up of people of varying skill and varying contributions to the community. Being an "active" player is not necessarily the pre-requisite, and the fact that Lee tried to turn the argument to that even though he knows how the SBR works (not to mention that it is irrelevant to the discussion) shows a lack of respect to his peers.

So basically even if they are making incorrect statements about Brawl's metagame, they're allowed to cast a vote on something that obviously affects the metagame (even if it really shouldn't).

My question is simply why certain Brawl elites that have proven to be knowledgeable and respectful aren't part of the vote and why inactive members are. There's a few that immediately come to my head on both sides.

What Lee did or didn't do has nothing to do with the fact that certain members of SBR tell me (but more importantly) the less-than-knowledgable/easily-persuaded masses incorrect information.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Why is that a problem x_X?

Because banning him is much easier.

 

[Atomsk_92]

Gheb you are sexy

 

[∫unk]

And what's the problem with having multiple counters? I don't think good players pick them in such a way that you do one counter until it gets countered. Dsmashing twice in a row should get grabbed. SH aerial isn't your only option. Most of MK's offense is countered by quick OOS options. It's the whole getting cornered by him thing that's the true problem if it is one. Not a one of his shallow attack sequences are broken. Not one of them has one counter that's easily countered by MK.
SIGH. lol >_>.

I dunno about pika but Marth has very limited options off shielding a well-spaced d-tilt against meta (assuming meta will follow up with his ~8 viable options after that).

I agree with Atomsk. Gheb is sexy.

 

[The Real Inferno]

Because banning him is much easier.

You know what else is easy? Counterpicking Donkey Kong. =D I love Brawl.

 

[aeghrur]

Vienna is awesome. Gheb, if I go to Vienna again, we need to play brawl, lol.
And eat cooked fish.
And go to that one restaurant that makes food using all parts of the cow and makes that delicious soup.
Yes.

 

[Anther]

Pika is king of limited options. Much like a squirrel in the middle of the street with a car approaching at 35....
Gheb being sexy, so is Atomsk.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

And go to that one restaurant that makes food using all parts of the cow and makes that delicious soup.

ololol

never heard of that before

:monkey: :mushroom:

 

[Atomsk_92]

I am sexy XD

 

[Master Raven]

Gheb is sexy.

 

[kirbstir]

As I'm sure you're aware, SBR's decision affects TO's even if they have no actual governing power. Especially smaller local tournaments are heavily affected by SBR's rulesets from what I've experienced.

And this is exactly where I would disagree. Since most SBR members are not elite brawl players or consistent TOs how would they base anything off experience. Seems they are going by what other members of SBR are laying out for them or by theorycrafting.

If the TOs have no backbone, that's their problem. If they truly feel MK deserves a ban, then it's their prerogative to do so or not. The SBR does not exist to coddle TOs, and the SBR does not exist to enforce any rule set by force.

Your second paragraph is loaded. First off, the SBR does include Brawl players, believe it or not. Lee was too busy trying to be right to ever bother considering the refutations that were given within the SBR itself to his argument about who should be allowed to vote or not. Of course, he wouldn't post that while burning his bridges.

Second, experience was not necessary to look at tournament results in various regions and see a distinct lack of super MK dominance that the pro-ban side said was happening. Not only that, but both sides of the argument had people you would described as "inexperienced" anyways; the fact that Lee would rather mislead the public into thinking only the anti-ban side was "inexperienced" shows a lack of maturity on his part in losing a vote about a video game.

Third, your allegation that the SBR came to this decision by theorycraft could not be more wrong. The pro-ban side was reliant on this supposed theorycrafting more than anybody; the fact that the SBR voted "no" was due to the fact that we were refuting the idea of theory-fighter swaying the votes, because hard, empirical evidence was showing otherwise to the pro-ban side's argument.

So basically even if they are making incorrect statements about Brawl's metagame, they're allowed to cast a vote on something that obviously affects the metagame (even if it really shouldn't).

My question is simply why certain Brawl elites that have proven to be knowledgeable and respectful aren't part of the vote and why inactive members are. There's a few that immediately come to my head on both sides.

What Lee did or didn't do has nothing to do with the fact that certain members of SBR tell me (but more importantly) the less-than-knowledgable/easily-persuaded masses incorrect information.

Nobody was making incorrect statements about Brawl's metagame. That is a straw-man argument, and is based on an assumed scenario.

You also assume that opinions of the top players weren't considered at all, which is also false. Chillin, M2k, Azen, etc voiced their concerns on the matter, making their stance for the most part transparent.

And what Lee did DOES have something to do with why you're asking this question, does it not? You're making the assumption that the SBR came to this conclusion with inexperienced voters, based on the information given to you by LeeHarris.

I also must point out the irony of you complaining about members of the SBR giving you incorrect information, as you're basing all of this off of LeeHarris's information.

 

[∫unk]

If the TOs have no backbone, that's their problem. If they truly feel MK deserves a ban, then it's their prerogative to do so or not. The SBR does not exist to coddle TOs, and the SBR does not exist to enforce any rule set by force.

Your second paragraph is loaded. First off, the SBR does include Brawl players, believe it or not. Lee was too busy trying to be right to ever bother considering the refutations that were given within the SBR itself to his argument about who should be allowed to vote or not. Of course, he wouldn't post that while burning his bridges.

Second, experience was not necessary to look at tournament results in various regions and see a distinct lack of super MK dominance that the pro-ban side said was happening. Not only that, but both sides of the argument had people you would described as "inexperienced" anyways; the fact that Lee would rather mislead the public into thinking only the anti-ban side was "inexperienced" shows a lack of maturity on his part in losing a vote about a video game.

By your description, most TOs don't have backbone. Some can barely run a tournament but I commend them for getting smashers together.

You keep assuming I'm only going off of what Lee is saying. He is not my connection to what goes on in there, he is simply the one that spoke out so I can go off it because it's public information.

But you seem hell bent on thinking that I'm defending Lee in any way. I think his arguments are dumb and he was dumb.

Of course some of them play brawl. There's also quite a few sour apples in there.

As far as people looking at tournament results... hell everyone with a brain could do that. Why do they get to vote and not everyone that has the ability to analyze data?

Shouldn't regular tourney-goers and TOs that can also analyze data opinions matter more than inactive members that can analyze data?

Third, your allegation that the SBR came to this decision by theorycraft could not be more wrong. The pro-ban side was reliant on this supposed theorycrafting more than anybody; the fact that the SBR voted "no" was due to the fact that we were refuting the idea of theory-fighter swaying the votes, because hard, empirical evidence was showing otherwise to the pro-ban side's argument.

*sigh* you really don't see where I'm coming from. I don't care about Metaknight's non-ban. I don't give a **** about Lee. I just care about how this vote was made and the process behind it.

Nobody was making incorrect statements about Brawl's metagame. That is a straw-man argument, and is based on an assumed scenario.

I can dig up stuff if you want but the most obvious and easiest place to see it is in the weekly character discussion. A lot of the information is wrong and some of it is just spam.

You also assume that opinions of the top players weren't considered at all, which is also false. Chillin, M2k, Azen, etc voiced their concerns on the matter, making their stance for the most part transparent.

lol no I don't. You obviously don't read well. I never said all of SBR was stupid.

And what Lee did DOES have something to do with why you're asking this question, does it not? You're making the assumption that the SBR came to this conclusion with inexperienced voters, based on the information given to you by LeeHarris.

Nah that's public information. I follow tournament results pretty closely. I'm avoiding naming names for a few reasons but if you need a list of people that are definitely not going to tournaments (pending evidence to the contrary from these members but I doubt they have any).

I also must point out the irony of you complaining about members of the SBR giving you incorrect information, as you're basing all of this off of LeeHarris's information.

Again, you'd be kidding yourself if you think I'm going off a few lines of what Lee said. I'm going off what I've seen myself from SBR members posting as well as a few connections which shouldn't really be mentioned.