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

[KO M]

So does this thread, have any effect on the decision? Since the polls clearly are saying he should be banned, or at least have a timeout.

 

[XienZo]

It's still an overall advantage as long as MK doesn't have worse than 50:50's.

It doesn't have to be "You pick him you win" to be an unfair advantage -- and for good competition, the playing field shield be fair. (This is entirely different from "cheap" things)

Not if Snake's good matchups both outnumber and are more extreme than his losing matchups.

That way, while MK would seem to always be slightly winning, Snake would win so many of his good matchups that even with his bad matchup losses, he's still ahead of MK.

Also, a person's style might let them learn Snake faster, increasing the effeciency over maining MK.

 

[salaboB]

Not if Snake's good matchups both outnumber and are more extreme than his losing matchups.

That way, while MK would seem to always be slightly winning, Snake would win so many of his good matchups that even with his bad matchup losses, he's still ahead of MK.

It doesn't matter if you win your good matchups more, you only have to get tromped on by a bad matchup once to be out -- and if the matchups are bad enough, your opponent can be significantly worse than you and still end up winning.

If MK has at worst 50:50, it comes down to you being better than your opponent -- and you can always counterpick them if they're not choosing MK.

Look at it this way: If you believe you're better than your opponent, who do you choose? Snake, who will win easily 75% of the time but face a disadvantaged fight 25% of the time (And you might even lose to this less skilled player if they choose one of them)? Or MK, who gives you an even fight no matter who your opponent uses, and since you know you're the better player you'll be very likely to win it?

Now, since you chose MK because you don't want to throw away the match due to being CP'ed as Snake, you might ask "But what if you don't know you're better?" Then you might gamble (And gambling with tournament wins is not really ideal, for either case), but if your opponent believes themself better they'll be smartest to choose MK as well -- for the same reasons as the previous paragraph had for you. So you'll end up facing a 50:50 matchup at best against MK no matter who you choose, and possibly worse than that, unless you choose MK yourself to prevent this.

So no, Snake winning his advantaged matchups by more than MK wins most of his isn't enough to make MK not overcentralizing. MK needs to have a disadvantaged matchup at least as heavily as whoever does it's worst disadvantaged matchup, so that picking MK in any counterpick situation is not simply the best option any longer -- otherwise he's bending to breaking the CP system (Depending on how serious you feel an advantage like that is).

 

[KO M]

Don't forget , as most likly its been mentioned, he can stall really, really easily, and because ledge stalling isn't banned. that is the biggest problem.

 

[XxBlackxX]

Not if Snake's good matchups both outnumber and are more extreme than his losing matchups.

That way, while MK would seem to always be slightly winning, Snake would win so many of his good matchups that even with his bad matchup losses, he's still ahead of MK.

Also, a person's style might let them learn Snake faster, increasing the effeciency over maining MK.

don't forget the CP system.
since snake has counters, his losing matchups will happen just as often as his winning matchups, whereas when vs. MK, your best hope is a neutral matchup. therefore, MK wins more overall.
and for the style thing, the same could be said for any top tier character.

 

[XienZo]

It doesn't matter if you win your good matchups more, you only have to get tromped on by a bad matchup once to be out -- and if the matchups are bad enough, your opponent can be significantly worse than you and still end up winning.

If MK has at worst 50:50, it comes down to you being better than your opponent -- and you can always counterpick them if they're not choosing MK.

Look at it this way: If you believe you're better than your opponent, who do you choose? Snake, who will win easily 75% of the time but face a disadvantaged fight 25% of the time (And you might even lose to this less skilled player if they choose one of them)? Or MK, who gives you an even fight no matter who your opponent uses, and since you know you're the better player you'll be very likely to win it?

Now, since you chose MK because you don't want to throw away the match due to being CP'ed as Snake, you might ask "But what if you don't know you're better?" Then you might gamble (And gambling with tournament wins is not really ideal, for either case), but if your opponent believes themself better they'll be smartest to choose MK as well -- for the same reasons as the previous paragraph had for you. So you'll end up facing a 50:50 matchup at best against MK no matter who you choose, and possibly worse than that, unless you choose MK yourself to prevent this.

So no, Snake winning his advantaged matchups by more than MK wins most of his isn't enough to make MK not overcentralizing. MK needs to have a disadvantaged matchup at least as heavily as whoever does it's worst disadvantaged matchup, so that picking MK in any counterpick situation is not simply the best option any longer -- otherwise he's bending to breaking the CP system (Depending on how serious you feel an advantage like that is).

You're assuming that you're a better player than everyone else you face.

Which, in that case, is absolutely true.

Which is why MK breaks the CP system at the highest level of the game.

Which is why MK should be banned.

Which is why I am pro-ban.

Spoiler

Sorry, I was totally arguing for the sake of arguing, I totally agree with you. I was just bored.

 

[SuperSayianRenan]

Banned f0r sure

Just to add my two cents even tho not many care hehe. I know its already been said but i feel the need to repeat!!! Metaknight is a gay character.... and I do not mean it in a Homo way or a happy skipping down the park way either... I mean he is a gay character with way tooooooooooooo much going for it. Priority up the ***, jumps or should i say flying nonstop, and a **** move that can be abused (teleport forever ). I have to say you don't c any other character who can teleport and stay in the invisible state for however long u want... unless u find one for zelda . But in all seriousness I won't say he is not beatable but he is a character that probably anyone can use and have a extremely large chance to win. Unfortunately for most ppl when they play in tournaments, if a person does not win the first round, you can expect them to try to switch to what my friend calls it the "metagay."

 

[XxBlackxX]

Just to add my two cents even tho not many care hehe. I know its already been said but i feel the need to repeat!!! Metaknight is a gay character.... and I do not mean it in a Homo way or a happy skipping down the park way either... I mean he is a gay character with way tooooooooooooo much going for it. Priority up the ***, jumps or should i say flying nonstop, and a **** move that can be abused (teleport forever ). I have to say you don't c any other character who can teleport and stay in the invisible state for however long u want... unless u find one for zelda . But in all seriousness I won't say he is not beatable but he is a character that probably anyone can use and have a extremely large chance to win. Unfortunately for most ppl when they play in tournaments, if a person does not win the first round, you can expect them to try to switch to what my friend calls it the "metagay."

well...idc has already been banned so no he can't teleport forever.

 

[ShadowLink84]

You're assuming that you're a better player than everyone else you face.

Which, in that case, is absolutely true.

Which is why MK breaks the CP system at the highest level of the game.

Which is why MK should be banned.

Which is why I am pro-ban.

Spoiler

Sorry, I was totally arguing for the sake of arguing, I totally agree with you. I was just bored.

You also made a rather large error too.

 

[Inui]

Snake is so awesome for beating MK. God bless that man.

Why is this even debated anymore? Pick Snake.

Ugh.

Going in circles.

 

[•Col•]

Snake is so awesome for beating MK. God bless that man.

Why is this even debated anymore? Pick Snake.

Ugh.

Going in circles.

Why go Snake when you can go MK? :D *shot*

 

[Inui]

Snake has the advantage.

I need to correct what I said above.

Pick Snake and camp.

 

[•Col•]

Even if he does, it's very small... xD And anyway, why pick Snake as a secondary, who has worse matchups, rather than MK? You still go even with MK, PLUS you have the advantage against your main's worst matches.

And actually, what am I talking about. Why doesn't everyone just main MK?

[I joke, of course. ]

 

[Inui]

Snake's bad match-ups are all mythological. His only real bad match is a slight loss to Dedede. The crap people spew about him losing to Falco/Olimar/whatever is pretty darn false from my experiences and from what I've seen at high level. If he does lose, it's by a very small amount that doesn't matter because Snake is amazing.

 

[•Col•]

Lol, bad match-ups are mythological, wtf? xD

And yeah, Snake may be amazing, but Metaknight is amazing-er. If he wasn't there'd be no fuss over this entire issue.

 

[HeroMystic]

Lol, bad match-ups are mythological, wtf? xD

He's saying the bad match-up ratios are generally based on theory, which I agree with.

 

[BentoBox]

Snake is the best character in the game.

 

[•Col•]

I realize that, but mythological isn't exactly the right word for it. xD It sounded funny, because it sounds like we're talking about centaurs or hydras or somethin.

Theoretical would have been a better word.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Snake is the best character in the game.

I love you

 

[1048576]

It doesn't matter if you win your good matchups more, you only have to get tromped on by a bad matchup once to be out -- and if the matchups are bad enough, your opponent can be significantly worse than you and still end up winning.

If MK has at worst 50:50, it comes down to you being better than your opponent -- and you can always counterpick them if they're not choosing MK.

Look at it this way: If you believe you're better than your opponent, who do you choose? Snake, who will win easily 75% of the time but face a disadvantaged fight 25% of the time (And you might even lose to this less skilled player if they choose one of them)? Or MK, who gives you an even fight no matter who your opponent uses, and since you know you're the better player you'll be very likely to win it?

Now, since you chose MK because you don't want to throw away the match due to being CP'ed as Snake, you might ask "But what if you don't know you're better?" Then you might gamble (And gambling with tournament wins is not really ideal, for either case), but if your opponent believes themself better they'll be smartest to choose MK as well -- for the same reasons as the previous paragraph had for you. So you'll end up facing a 50:50 matchup at best against MK no matter who you choose, and possibly worse than that, unless you choose MK yourself to prevent this.

So no, Snake winning his advantaged matchups by more than MK wins most of his isn't enough to make MK not overcentralizing. MK needs to have a disadvantaged matchup at least as heavily as whoever does it's worst disadvantaged matchup, so that picking MK in any counterpick situation is not simply the best option any longer -- otherwise he's bending to breaking the CP system (Depending on how serious you feel an advantage like that is).

Quoted for emphasis.

 

[arch knight]

snake isnt the best........
no one ive seen uses snake offensively they just camp and camp and camp and camp and camp with nades and c4 with a few rockets thrown in this is brawl ppl get out there and fight!!

 

[Lore]

I didn't vote since I'm pretty much on the fence on this one. There are so many different pros and cons to this, not to mention the possiblities of what would happen if he was banned.

There's too much debating about it going on, in my opinion. Instead of actually getting results, we are just stalling the process.

I think that a test ban for a few months would be excellent. If it's good, then we could keep it that way. If not, hey, at least we tried.

 

[camzaman]

The slipperly slope argument is BS. There is no way that anything other than MK or D3's stupid infinites would get this much ban support from the community, as stupid as the elitists think it is...

 

[ShadowLink84]

He's saying the bad match-up ratios are generally based on theory, which I agree with.

Like the ROB vs Snake matchup?
Pikachu vs Snake?
Marth vs Snake?

So you're saying that those respective character boards just toss it out there and act like its true, but then what about the arguments they brought with it?

Also, if Snake is the best character, why is it that he is noticeably worse than MK as a character and cannot answer as much as MK?
what about the issues that have been brought up in the past and present?

what does Snake have to answer ROB's camping ability?
What about Olimar's?

how does he deal with Pikachu's QAC and other techniques that allow him to get close very quickly and safely?
how does he deal with his blatant weaknesses?

let alone that you bash theory as if what has been said has not been attempted to be proven as true, on the fact that they are theory, but then choose to ignore the major flaws in deductive reasoning?

You had m2k say Snake's Dtilt was longer than MK's Dtilt based on his experience in the matches.

How is it okay to accept results where such unmeasurable factors like mindgames appear?

I have yet to see anyone truly explain why we should completely disregard the supported theories that have been provided but then accept the results that agree with an argument.

Whatever im wasting my time anyway.

 

[The Slayer]

Um cam, I don't think anyone made a recent saying for that arugment dude (unless I'm mistaken).

 

[HeroMystic]

Stuff.

Stop looking for an argument and re-read what I said.

He's saying the bad match-up ratios are generally based on theory, which I agree with.

Cherry-picking specific arguments does not go against what I (or Inui) has said.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Stop looking for an argument and re-read what I said.

He said that he didn't agree with the bad matchups because they were based in general on theory.
You went and agreed.
If he does not agree with the bad matchups because of the theory involved, that means he does not accept theory and so with you being in agreement, also believe that theory should not be accepted for those matchups.

This gives the idea that theory should not be accepted.
Even if that wasn't your intent, what you said earlier does give off that idea.

Looking for an argument indeed.

Cherry-picking specific arguments does not go against what I (or Inui) has said.

Which specific arguments did I cherry pick?
I commented on your reasoning for disagreeing with the matchup, not necessarily the matchup itself.

 

[Mew2King]

shadowlink, your sig is extremely stupid, because everything inui said was actually true from that situation, where people were giving him MASSIVE **** for what happened when there was a compilation of multiple reasons which he explained to defend himself. Putting it in yellow only makes you look like a common bandwagoner and douchebag.

Inui Falco ***** Snake, Chillin thinks so too. Falco does better vs Snake than DDD does, I'll tell you that much. I actually beat Snakes worse with Falco than I do with DDD, and I am not joking at all. You probably just F tilt Atomsk when he attacks, where all you have to do is run away, camp, pivot grab away from him or dash grab towards him when he dashes at you, and guess when hell dash grab you and F tilt. If he down throws you off the edge just double jump air dodge back on right away. You will land on the stage before DDD can Bair you. DDD can down throw down tilt combo, but you can easily DI that up and towards the stage and DJ up B and you'll be fine. The match is not nearly as bad as it's percieved to be.

 

[ShadowLink84]

shadowlink, your sig is extremely stupid, because everything inui said was actually true from that situation, where people were giving him MASSIVE **** for what happened when there was a compilation of multiple reasons which he explained to defend himself. Putting it in yellow only makes you look like a common bandwagoner and douchebag.

The signature has been here for quite some time and I told Inui himself that the signature was here just to poke fun at him and is not meant in an offensive way.
Similar to not letting your friend forget the time he hit on a guy.
It is also yellow because I like yellow.
**** happened, Inui just happened to be on the receiving end when it happened.
It also turned out to be rather funny.


As for the rest of what you said, I find it rather funny that you are getting all uppity and offended because of a signature that isn't even addressed to you, and is obviously just poking fun at Inui, and has been here over a month.
Should have commented earlier.

tl;dr: You're wasting your time on something that doesn't concern you, and doesn't even matter. Spend some time and dictate how MK is not ban worthy instead.
Last I saw, a signature was far lower priority wise, than something that would affect the smash community.

Yellow just for you

Edit: WTF at random matchup advice.

 

[UTDZac]

Yellow just for you

As soon as smashboards gets a white theme, or non-dark theme, I'll be using that. Then I won't be able to read anything you post anymore.

Stupid color fonts. Worse than MK.

 

[ShadowLink84]

As soon as smashboards gets a white theme, or non-dark theme, I'll be using that. Then I won't be able to read anything you post anymore.

Stupid color fonts. Worse than MK.

XD I don't like color fonts either but I put it just because M2k seemed bothered that I colored my sig.

 

[wangston]

I can't beat meta knight, ban him. Perfect logic. He has no bad match ups, ban him. Perfect logic. His move set is too good, ban him. He has a 6:4 advantage or greater on everyone ban him!!!! Basically what it comes down to is I can't win a 6:4 match up so let's ban him.

 

[Mew2King]

i've seen that same sig before by random md/va players. It seems like just an excuse that someone is "cool" by bandwagoning on making fun of inui, and I can't respect people that do that. I've been on the receiving end of bandwagoning for many years so I know exactly what it's like and it's extremely gay. It also isn't funny.

 

[ShadowLink84]

I can't beat meta knight, ban him. Perfect logic. He has no bad match ups, ban him. Perfect logic. His move set is too good, ban him. He has a 6:4 advantage or greater on everyone ban him!!!! Basically what it comes down to is I can't win a 6:4 match up so let's ban him.

ITT, we smack people with fish and act likes its fine to make really bad generic statements.

i've seen that same sig before by random md/va players. It seems like just an excuse that someone is "cool" by bandwagoning on making fun of inui, and I can't respect people that do that.

last I saw, it was only myself and OS that had sigs. I actually stole it since I found it rather funny.
In anycase, the behavior of others cannot be attributed to myself.
Unless of course you believe its fine to slap people under a generic label and ignore the reasoning that they use.

I've been on the receiving end of bandwagoning for many years so I know exactly what it's like and it's extremely gay. It also isn't funny.

Gay? Maybe
funny? No
Hilarious? yes

What are the chances that someone would be suffering a hangover, and injureed their hands when a tournament was the next day?
Hell if it happened to me I would have sigged it.

In anycase I had told Inui I would remove it if it bothers him and even asked if he had sig I could replace it with, considering he hasn't demanded I remove it yet, or is offended by it, then its perfectly fine where it sits.

Again why are you wasting your time pestering me about my sig?

 

[HeroMystic]

He said that he didn't agree with the bad matchups because they were based in general on theory.
You went and agreed.
If he does not agree with the bad matchups because of the theory involved, that means he does not accept theory and so with you being in agreement, also believe that theory should not be accepted for those matchups.

This gives the idea that theory should not be accepted.
Even if that wasn't your intent, what you said earlier does give off that idea.

Looking for an argument indeed.

My intent was to say that a lot (not all of them) of the bad match-ups in the threads are indeed based on theory and not based on true experience.

Theory at this time should be accepted because Brawl is still a pretty young game and there is not enough experience nor character development to make accurate judgements. If however was like Melee that has 7+ years of tournament time, then no, theory should not take place at all.

Marth has a crapload of 'semi-****' match-ups on that board, but Marth players in a competitive setting go down to the last stock or even lose to these characters on a consistent basis. Does these disprove these match-ups? Maybe, but it shows that there is a lot more to take into account than 'theory' and 'factual data' (No offense to the Marth boards).

Match-up threads as of now seem to act more like 'guides' than data.

I commented on your reasoning for disagreeing with the matchup, not necessarily the matchup itself.

I don't exactly understand the debate lingo here these days since I lurk more than I argue. I guess I should've said you were strawmanning by giving me specific arguments to answer but doesn't necessarily go against my intentions.

I am not saying theory should take place, but I am saying that using that theory as an argument is a poor claim when not proven.

 

[ShadowLink84]

My intent was to say that a lot (not all of them) of the bad match-ups in the threads are indeed based on theory and not based on true experience.

Except the issu with true experience is that people do not notice things in the heat fo a match.
m2k saying Snake's Dilt was longer than MK's for example.
There are also those factors such as mindgames that cannot be measured.

of course this does not mean true experience should not be accepted, however, we must admit that there are flaws to it.

Theory at this time should be accepted because Brawl is still a pretty young game and there is not enough experience nor character development to make accurate judgements. If however was like Melee that has 7+ years of tournament time, then no, theory should not take place at all.

I actually have to disagree. Theory that is purly theory without any grounds to it cannot be accepted.

If it is supported such as MK outranging Snake's ground moves with his Dtilt, then it can be accepted, simply because there is evidence supporting the theory. (like evolution).
You have theory come up with melee every nnow and then.

Marth has a crapload of 'semi-****' match-ups on that board, but Marth players in a competitive setting go down to the last stock or even lose to these characters on a consistent basis. Does these disprove these match-ups? Maybe, but it shows that there is a lot more to take into account than 'theory' and 'factual data' (No offense to the Marth boards).

semi ****?
Can you clarify a bit on this then?

Like I said in that real experience, the things we cannot measure such as mindgames come into play. That is the flaw in experience.
What would you believe? Actual frame data or experience?
if something is factual, no amount of matches will cause that fact to change.
Sonic's Fsmash still comes out on frame 17, Pit's Fsmash coemes out on frame , and Snake till causes a Sonic boom when he does a Utilt.

Match-up threads as of now seem to act more like 'guides' than data.

That depends on what you reference to, the Marth boards tend to be more factual in their arguments.
Or at least Emblem Lord is.

I don't exactly understand the debate lingo here these days since I lurk more than I argue. I guess I should've said you were strawmanning by giving me specific arguments to answer but doesn't necessarily go against my intentions.

Strawmanning is when I misinterpret your argument, and then respond to it and act as if I refuted it. Not when I give you specific arguments to answer.
I was more like challenging you to answer as to why those bad matchups aren't bad as they say. You certainly must have reasons for disagreeing with them.

I am not saying theory should take place, but I am saying that using that theory as an argument is a poor claim when not proven.

i don't believe anyone has attempted to leave their argument without support.

 

[Espy Rose]

shadowlink, your sig is extremely stupid, because everything inui said was actually true from that situation, where people were giving him MASSIVE **** for what happened when there was a compilation of multiple reasons which he explained to defend himself. Putting it in yellow only makes you look like a common bandwagoner and douchebag.

Inui Falco ***** Snake, Chillin thinks so too. Falco does better vs Snake than DDD does, I'll tell you that much. I actually beat Snakes worse with Falco than I do with DDD, and I am not joking at all. You probably just F tilt Atomsk when he attacks, where all you have to do is run away, camp, pivot grab away from him or dash grab towards him when he dashes at you, and guess when hell dash grab you and F tilt. If he down throws you off the edge just double jump air dodge back on right away. You will land on the stage before DDD can Bair you. DDD can down throw down tilt combo, but you can easily DI that up and towards the stage and DJ up B and you'll be fine. The match is not nearly as bad as it's percieved to be.

No Johns.

10johns.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Marth has a crapload of 'semi-****' match-ups on that board, but Marth players in a competitive setting go down to the last stock or even lose to these characters on a consistent basis. Does these disprove these match-ups? Maybe, but it shows that there is a lot more to take into account than 'theory' and 'factual data' (No offense to the Marth boards).

What are these "semi-****" matchups that are so abundant on the Marth boards? Marth has a lot of very slight advantages, yes, but most of his semi-**** and **** matchups are against simply bad characters (characters who are already destroyed by other top tiers).

 

[adumbrodeus]

What are these "semi-****" matchups that are so abundant on the Marth boards? Marth has a lot of very slight advantages, yes, but most of his semi-**** and **** matchups are against simply bad characters (characters who are already destroyed by other top tiers).

Semi-**** means soft counters, aka-slight advantages (though, "slight advantage" can also refer to 55-45s, we REALLY need to standardize how we talk about match-ups because WAY too many people are saying things that are misinterpreted by others due to differences in terminology use). **** is 70-30 or better.

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^Well, then I have a different definition of **** matchups. When I think of **** matchups I think of 80-20s or other "unwinnable" matchups.

People really should clarify what they are talking about, or at least use more commonly used terms like "soft counter" or "slight advantage."