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

[kirbstir]

Because the best option to beat MK would be another MK. I was hypothetically answering the question "Why would no counters warrant a ban?"

That still doesn't answer the question. I'm asking "why does it matter that the best option to beat MK is himself [hypothetically of course]?" What is it about "breaking the counterpick system" that is ban-worthy? People have just been saying doing this is cause for banning without explanation.

 

[Overswarm]

That still doesn't answer the question. I'm asking "why does it matter that the best option to beat MK is himself [hypothetically of course]?" What is it about "breaking the counterpick system" that is ban-worthy? People have just been saying doing this is cause for banning without explanation.

Most people "get it" without having to have it explained multiple times.

If one character is always the best option, to not pick that character is to give you a disadvantage. That's flawed game design, and forces people to do things they don't want to do on a very limited scale. If we had, say, 4 or 5 characters we could choose and then a few more than we could choose if we just had more effort put into it it'd be fantastic. No one cares about Falcon. We do care about everyone below MK though.

 

[viparagon]

That still doesn't answer the question. I'm asking "why does it matter that the best option to beat MK is himself [hypothetically of course]?" What is it about "breaking the counterpick system" that is ban-worthy? People have just been saying doing this is cause for banning without explanation.

cause thats affectively banning all other characters

 

[Frogsterking]

That still doesn't answer the question. I'm asking "why does it matter that the best option to beat MK is himself [hypothetically of course]?" What is it about "breaking the counterpick system" that is ban-worthy? People have just been saying doing this is cause for banning without explanation.

I don't know how to explain it to you

If MK has an advantage over most of the cast and has no bad matchups, then people will need to learn to play MK to counter him, and then they will keep using MK since they will always win more with him than with their other main.

 

[salaboB]

That still doesn't answer the question. I'm asking "why does it matter that the best option to beat MK is himself [hypothetically of course]?" What is it about "breaking the counterpick system" that is ban-worthy? People have just been saying doing this is cause for banning without explanation.

Because it overcentralizes the metagame to being MK.

Here's how it goes:

If MK has no counterpicks, your best option for the first double blind choice is MK. If your opponent picks someone else, they'll at best have a neutral to you, at worst a disadvantage. So to prevent randomly being counterpicked and having to fight at a disadvantage initially, the only smart move is to pick MK (Both players).

After you win and are going to be counterpicked, you must pick MK if you don't want to have a disadvantaged matchup. So if you win the first round you pick MK so they can't CP you. If you lose, they'll pick MK so they can't be CP'ed. Third round (If it goes to that) will be a reverse of that again.

So if both players are capable of playing enough characters to CP everyone who can be, and are playing smartest to avoid CPs, MK will be used in every single round of a set.

That's why MK having at worst neutrals is bad for the CP system and warrants him being banned if it's true.

 

[Anther]

At worst neutrals is not a reason for banning? lol?
Be better at the game with your neutral character and winsies. What's this deal with crutching on lopsided matchups and counterpick stages? x_X. A lot of people are even starting to figure that a lot more than just snake are a "Challenge" for MK mains =P.

I'm still attesting that people are letting their johns make metaknight beat them as opposed to making sure they aren't making bad decisions in the matchup...

 

[salaboB]

Be better at the game with your neutral character and winsies.

Yes, you can do this...of course, that means that when you face MK in the first round and when you're trying to CP your opponent, it's skill versus skill. But then when you stay with your "I'm better with my neutral than MK" character after a win and they CP you, they suddenly have an advantage for that round.

So you could be slightly better than them and still be more likely to lose the overall set due to being CP'ed after your initial win. Yay skill being what decides victory!

If MK has a bad enough matchup (At least as bad as his best CP character's worst) then he won't break the CP system. If he doesn't have that kind of disadvantaged matchup though, then by maining him you're giving yourself an overall advantage over maining anyone else.

 

[CR4SH]

If MK has an advantage over all of the cast and has no bad matchups

I fixed it for you.

 

[Cactupuss]

Anther...I cant tell if you are being sarcastic or not?

I'm tired of hearing MK players say "get better" or "get a better character"

If I have to stop playing the character that I have mained since day 1 (lucas) just because one overplayed match up is 80-20 in their favor, that's wrong.

It's even worse when I can pick up MK and immediately reach a level of skill comparable to my main character in a fraction of a time

Why, in this case would I even keep playing my main? I obviously have such a better situation as MK. If I can get better than the character Ive been playing for months, in a week, think of how far I could take MK

The fact is my main is FUN to play as, I love his playstyle, and I'm good with him. I have close matchups with MOST of the cast, but when I'm forced off of him because of ONE charater the game becomes less Fun.

Yes, they can also CP with Marth, or G&W, but why would they? MK is so much better, requires less skill, and is generally better, there is simply no reason NOT to use MK

 

[Nic64]

I know won't someone please think of the lucas mains? It's so wrong how meta knight single handedly makes this dominant character unviable.

 

[Flayl]

CP a character that goes even with MK and does at least OK against other Lucas's bad matchups.

 

[ADHD]

Single naner lock=disadvantaged match up with the rest of Diddy's advantageous attributes.

No, it's really not that great. Sure you can get a stock off if you can pull it off, but the hard part is actually getting it started.

Anyway mk should be allowed.

 

[Cactupuss]

I know won't someone please think of the lucas mains? It's so wrong how meta knight single handedly makes this dominant character unviable.

This isn't just about the Lucas mains! Lucas is just an EXAMPLE of what I am talking about!

MK has MANY 70-30 matchups in his favor, yeah sure there's about 6 or 7 characters that can make it all the way to a 60-40 matchup, but my point is the other twenty some character mains have to switch in order to even the odds!

I think if there were LESS MK's there would be MORE people maining uncommon characters LIKE Lucas, or Mario, or Oli, or any of the more uncommon characters. It would give the game more variety, and it would make it more fun.

CP a character that goes even with MK and does at least OK against other Lucas's bad matchups.

What like...METAKNIGHT? exactly my point.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Yes, you can do this...of course, that means that when you face MK in the first round and when you're trying to CP your opponent, it's skill versus skill. But then when you stay with your "I'm better with my neutral than MK" character after a win and they CP you, they suddenly have an advantage for that round.

No. It means you win games 1 and 3, they win game 2, big deal. 3 games sets are frequent and I would say usually the person who wins the first game wins the third (random statistics but I would estimate around 60-70% of the time-a number lower than it should be only because many players just CP to starter stages instead of a stage that gives them the most lopsided advantage).

MK has MANY 70-30 matchups in his favor, yeah sure there's about 6 or 7 characters that can make it all the way to a 60-40 matchup, but my point is the other twenty some character mains have to switch in order to even the odds!

You just described Melee top tiers.

 

[kirbstir]

Most people "get it" without having to have it explained multiple times.

If one character is always the best option, to not pick that character is to give you a disadvantage. That's flawed game design, and forces people to do things they don't want to do on a very limited scale. If we had, say, 4 or 5 characters we could choose and then a few more than we could choose if we just had more effort put into it it'd be fantastic. No one cares about Falcon. We do care about everyone below MK though.

1) Not picking the best character in the game gives you a disadvantage, surprise. A lack of a counter does not equate to a lack of "being able to be defeated"; something you don't seem to understand. Just because something is the "best" option does not exclude other options from being proper also. This is the major thing that has yet to be addressed, and has NOT been addressed "multiple times."

2) Where's the evidence for any of this? This is theory fighter again; I'll just point at yet another MD/VA tourney with results that don't show any of this happening. (Chu's last biweekly)

 

[gantrain05]

1) Not picking the best character in the game gives you a disadvantage, surprise. A lack of a counter does not equate to a lack of "being able to be defeated"; something you don't seem to understand. Just because something is the "best" option does not exclude other options from being proper also. This is the major thing that has yet to be addressed, and has NOT been addressed "multiple times."

2) Where's the evidence for any of this? This is theory fighter again; I'll just point at yet another MD/VA tourney with results that don't show any of this happening. (Chu's last biweekly)

......i think what he's stating is many people have resorted to just picking MK for the first round because he's the one single character without a single disadvantage, and yeah it kinda does break the counterpick system, thats the reason we play best of 3, loser gets to counterpick, it doesn't really work if theres not really a counterpick for the situation lol.

 

[Anther]

Yes, you can do this...of course, that means that when you face MK in the first round and when you're trying to CP your opponent, it's skill versus skill. But then when you stay with your "I'm better with my neutral than MK" character after a win and they CP you, they suddenly have an advantage for that round.

So you could be slightly better than them and still be more likely to lose the overall set due to being CP'ed after your initial win. Yay skill being what decides victory!

If MK has a bad enough matchup (At least as bad as his best CP character's worst) then he won't break the CP system. If he doesn't have that kind of disadvantaged matchup though, then by maining him you're giving yourself an overall advantage over maining anyone else.

Why lose the 3rd match again o=? I'm confused ;_;. Losing the second match doesn't give you the right to let them outplay you the third game >_>

-0-

Lucas seems to have problems with the rangey characters in general you seem to be saying, run in and powershield XD. jk. Why is lucas so much worse against meta than other chars? I haven't really seen anything of lucas lately besides a good lucas I've played online, and recovery def isn't the issue XD. I almost think lucas should be able to give MK a run for his money, he's not particularly laggy or slow and his bat is devastating... but.. I also don't play earthbound characters at all lol.
I'm a lil sarcastic but mostly incoherent in most of my posts btw.
More people should read my huge fighting metaknight post and tell me what they think... because it's huge. It's almost not Pika Exclusive.

 

[Ulevo]

MK has MANY 70-30 matchups in his favor

Um. No he doesn't.

 

[Cactupuss]

You just described Melee top tiers.

First of all Melee is hardly comparable to brawl given the VASTLY different playstyle

The difference is Melee has Fox, Falco, Skiek, and Marth ALL of which have fairly even odds against each other, in other words there are counters to all of them, MK's counter IS MK

 

[Zankoku]

If you somehow don't have a counterpick where the other player does worse, you should counterpick where you do best, obviously.

 

[Ulevo]

First of all Melee is hardly comparable to brawl given the VASTLY different playstyle

The difference is Melee has Fox, Falco, Skiek, and Marth ALL of whch have fairly even odds against each other, in other words there are counters to all of them, MK's counter IS MK

I hope you realize you just contradicted yourself by saying "melee is hardly comparable" and then making a comparison.

Also, how do all the Top Tiers of Melee have counters if they simply have "fairly even odds" against each other? You're not making sense at all.

And no, Meta Knight's counter is not Meta Knight. You don't even know what a counter is.

 

[Zankoku]

And no, Meta Knight's counter is not Meta Knight. You don't even know what a counter is.

I dunno, we had a big discussion in the SBR and we could only determine that Meta Knight might have an even matchup against Meta Knight. For all we know, Meta Knight could very well counter Meta Knight.

 

[kirbstir]

......i think what he's stating is many people have resorted to just picking MK for the first round because he's the one single character without a single disadvantage, and yeah it kinda does break the counterpick system, thats the reason we play best of 3, loser gets to counterpick, it doesn't really work if theres not really a counterpick for the situation lol.

The actual reason 2/3 exists is to prevent 1 bad match from knocking people out. Reduction of errors in results.

Counter-picking evolved over the course of melee, and there were plenty of tournaments that didn't follow the counter-picking system we use today well into melee's lifespan, so you could say those tourneys broke the counter-picking system as well =p

 

[Cactupuss]

I hope you realize you just contradicted yourself by saying "melee is hardly comparable" and then making a comparison.

Also, how do all the Top Tiers of Melee have counters if they simply have "fairly even odds" against each other? You're not making sense at all.

And no, Meta Knight's counter is not Meta Knight. You don't even know what a counter is.

I'm sorry, "counter" would be the wrong term. the point I am trying to make is that melee top tiers are much more balanced. I should have said MK's best option is MK since it is 50/50 odds and the winner will be the one with the most skill

by the way, I'm not stupid, stop trying to pick out every last thing I say. It doesn't take a genius to see what I was trying to say, and I don't want to argue for the sake of arguing, so next time, just make your argument without insulting my intelligence.

 

[RDK]

Most people "get it" without having to have it explained multiple times.

If one character is always the best option, to not pick that character is to give you a disadvantage. That's flawed game design, and forces people to do things they don't want to do on a very limited scale. If we had, say, 4 or 5 characters we could choose and then a few more than we could choose if we just had more effort put into it it'd be fantastic. No one cares about Falcon. We do care about everyone below MK though.

In MvC2, if you don't pick Storm, Magneto, and Cable you're effectively ****ed. The analogy is essentially the same. Was anybody banned?

And I don't see how some of the other characters don't qualify for "4 or 5 characters we could choose and then a few more than we could choose if we just had more effort put into it" as a standard for how well they do against MK. You're saying there are no other characters like that?

I'm sorry, "counter" would be the wrong term. the point I am trying to make is that melee top tiers are much more balanced. I should have said MK's best option is MK since it is 50/50 odds and the winner will be the one with the most skill

The most skill in using MK.

by the way, I'm not stupid, stop trying to pick out every last thing I say. It doesn't take a genius to see what I was trying to say, and I don't want to argue for the sake of arguing, so next time, just make your argument without insulting my intelligence.

Do you mean that the top 4 counter each other, or that other characters in the game counter them? Because that sentence makes no sense.

Either way, you need to increase your Melee knowledge.

 

[Zankoku]

Melee top tiers are only "much more balanced" if you go based on the assumption that your numbers are already completely accurate.

 

[gantrain05]

i dunno, i do think that melee did have alot more balance when it comes down to it, i believe the AT's in melee made alot more characters viable, you had the basic top 5 fox/falco/marth/shiek/(peach), and then there were still others who were doing extremely well also, falcon/jiggs/dr.mario/ganon/DK/and even yoshi, and to me anyways, it just felt that the gap from top-bottom tier wasn't nearly as large as it is in brawl.

 

[AlphaZealot]

First of all Melee is hardly comparable to brawl given the VASTLY different playstyle

Playstyle is irrevelent. We are talking about the theory that the ultimate realization of Brawls metagame is that everyone will switch to MK. The statement was made that the top few characters in Brawl make all the other cast in Brawl irrevelent. This was also true in Melee. Like it or not, Pichu never did win a notable tournament-just as Ganon will never win a notable tournament in Brawl.

 

[RDK]

Like it or not, Pichu never did win a notable tournament-just as Ganon will never win a notable tournament in Brawl.

Unless you're Sliq, GUFFAW.

 

[Tenki]

More people should read my huge fighting metaknight post and tell me what they think... because it's huge. It's almost not Pika Exclusive.

Yeaaah. It's amazing.

I'm tired of hearing MK players say "get better" or "get a better character"

If I have to stop playing the character that I have mained since day 1 (lucas) just because one overplayed match up is 80-20 in their favor, that's wrong.

It's even worse when I can pick up MK and immediately reach a level of skill comparable to my main character in a fraction of a time

Why, in this case would I even keep playing my main? I obviously have such a better situation as MK. If I can get better than the character Ive been playing for months, in a week, think of how far I could take MK

The fact is my main is FUN to play as, I love his playstyle, and I'm good with him. I have close matchups with MOST of the cast, but when I'm forced off of him because of ONE charater the game becomes less Fun.

Okay. For the record, when it comes to a 'serious' match, I play Sonic exclusively.

Get better.

;o

Read Anther's post and decide if you have the skill and matchup knowledge to keep up with someone who's playing MK.

For example, do you hold shield for far too long when MK attacks you, instead of releasing shield right away and trying to punish that way? Do you DI away from MK's damagers/juggle hits, and DI up/towards MK's kill moves - or do you do the opposite and take too much damage? Can you see the openings in FH/DJ F-airs, or do you just see a completely lagless aerial? When you see a shuttle loop, do you see a wall of priority covered by glide attack or do you see an opening that you can punish out of shield?

There are lots of things that many players keep doing poorly in matches, or frankly, don't have the reflex to take advantage of.

Alot of matchups were decided from early on, especially against the projected low-tier characters. And then finally, someone who actually mains a low-tier character goes up against someone and shows them that things they thought were exploitable might not really be.

That supposed 80-20 might not really be 80-20, for all you know, it could have been decided when people thought Lucas was OP with his u-smash lol.

/devil's advocate
/BS
;D

 

[1048576]

Fox goes even with Marth, Falco, Sheik

Sheik counters Marth but loses to Falco

Marth counters Falco

In the end, you have four viable characters and a stable Meta.

MK goes even with or counters everyone.

Everyone else can be countered.

Under those premises, the metagame is stable with only one character. MK. If we decide that a one-character meta is unacceptable, we should ban MK.

Some people are saying that someone, somewhere has an advantage against MK. If that's true, then the meta is stable with three characters. MK, his counter, and his counter's best counter.

I think the burden of proof is on anti-ban to show that a given matchup devaites away from evenness.

 

[Zankoku]

How does Meta Knight counter everyone except Snake? Unless by counter you even mean something as close as a 55:45 advantage (or maybe 60:40, which Melee Sheik vs Marth is).

 

[1048576]

You're right. I meant to say goes even or better. I'll edit now.

 

[RDK]

Fox goes even with Marth, Falco, Sheik

Sheik counters Marth but loses to Falco

Marth counters Falco

In the end, you have four viable characters and a stable Meta.

MK counters everyone except Snake, goes even with Snake.

Someone counters Snake.

Under those premises, the metagame is stable with only one character. MK. If we decide that a one-character meta is unacceptable, we should ban MK.

Some people are saying that someone, somewhere has an advantage against MK. If that's true, then the meta is stable with three characters. MK, his counter, and his counter's counter.

I think the burden of proof is on anti-ban to show that a given matchup devaites away from evenness.

You're making no sense. Even if anything you said was true, then it's perfectly fine. MK does well against the majority of the cast, barring Snake, and Snake is an arguable counter for MK, not to mention you can just go MK yourself, or choose a character that doesn't have an awful matchup with him and do your homework. That's, at the least, a stable meta of two shifting characters, not one.

 

[Anther]

if you run around thinking the matchup is 80:20 and use it as the basis of your matchup arguments .. you probably are rarely gonna beat MKs. I really doubt any matchup against him is that bad... unless it's link. Link's the only char that I think ... isn't as athletic as everyone else...

All of Pika's matchups are 50:50 at worse. =p

 

[Cactupuss]

The statement was made that the top few characters in Brawl make all the other cast in Brawl irrevelent.

I believe with MK out of the picture the game would be more balanced, similar to what gamtrain5 said about melee.

Example (this is not necessarily how it would work out, but characters would fall into place eventually)

There would be the basic accepted "best" characters Snake, DDD, G&W, Falco, and others that would do very well, ROB, DK, Marth, Wario etc

In other words no one has a more commanding lead than MK and every one else has significant downfalls and weaknesses that makes them balanced.

 

[Zankoku]

Ganondorf is worse off than Link against Meta Knight. At least Link has things he can throw and a sword.

Ganondorf side-taunts.

I believe with MK out of the picture the game would be more balanced, similar to what gamtrain5 said about melee.

You mean like how if you remove Fox, Falco, Marth, and Sheik from Melee, the game does actually become more balanced? Who would've thought! I bet if you take Kirby out of that game it'd become more balanced because then you'd be removing a character with a ton of TERRIBLE matchups too.

 

[Cactupuss]

sorry my bad MK is 65-35 against Lucas...still a commanding lead though

 

[Anther]

Numbers on matchups >_<, it varys so much player to player, especially on underdeveloped characters they're just mad silly in my eyes. I'm betting the majority of Diddy players were saying MK was 70-30 before several people started showing Diddy's amazing gayness. XD

You mean like how if you remove Fox, Falco, Marth, and Sheik from Melee, the game does actually become more balanced? Who would've thought! I bet if you take Kirby out of that game it'd become more balanced because then you'd be removing a character with a ton of TERRIBLE matchups too.

Do people really want to remove the only fun characters from the game? XD.
ps. Captain Falco is not fun in melee you're all stupid.

 

[Cornstalk]

The major concern I have with a character like Metaknight is his potential to kill the interest in the game. This happened to me with melee. All the aspiring pros basically started switching to characters that were ranked high/top in the tier lists. The switch was because -winning- was fun, but that didn't mean they actually enjoyed playing that character. Every time I'd go to do casuals and dollar entrance tournaments... I'd fight nothing but Fox, Falco, and Marth.

Frankly I just got sick of fighting those same 3 characters over and over and pretty much stop playing all together. Because I stopped playing, several of my friends stopped playing too (we mostly played at my house.) Were we top players? No, not even close. But it does take the average joe players to fill those tourny spots and even give top players their celebrity sort of status.


So the biggest issue I see happening with Metaknight is a lot of players, regardless of skill, giving up on Brawl all together because they get sick of almost every match being against Metaknight. Over use of Metaknight is going to chase away fresh players and fresh ideas except for -more- use of Metaknight. :\


Not being in a tourny scene, I can only offer speculation from an average joe. But right now, I don't even -want- to go to a tournament because I'd rather slam my head against a wall then spend a day fighting almost Metaknight exclusively.