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

[Roy_R]

Look at my signature

:ouch:

EDIT: signature is gone! some other time then

 

[adumbrodeus]

^^^^^^^^^^


I don't know where these people get these numbers from anyway.

It's like they say 50:50 can go either way, and then 55 and 60 are disadvantaged... but the NUMBERS are close so it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter what the numbers represent, the numbers themselves are close! You can beat that matchup!

Nothing else exists until you get to 70:30 matchups and people say "ROFL more like 60:40". Thne there are 90:10 and 100:0 matchups which are the exact same thing.

People with numbers make me full of rage.

42.



But seriously, 55-45 is a very bare advantage where one character will have slightly more amortized wins then the other, but just slightly.

Plenty of 60-40s are used, and they're when a match is tipable by a few relatively small mistakes.

70-30s mean you can basically expect to win unless the skill gap is quite large.

Anything beyond that is just higher levels of **** until you hit about 99-1, in which case you've just gotta be stupid to lose.


The numbers do mean something, people just have a habit of pulling numbers from where the sun don't shine.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Yeah, screw listening to people that actually play the game and the characters we're talking about. Let's listen to Yuna (who?) and Emblem Lord, who doesn't play.

You need to stop and think about what you say for a second.
Yuna and Emblem Lord don't play the game? At all?
Or maybe you mean competitively which means you're wrong when it comes to Yuna and also wrong in the fact that you do not need to play competitively to understand the going ons as well as what is involved.

Last I saw, in spite of Emblem Lord not being on the level of Ken of Azen, he was still praised for being spot on with his Marth knowledge and much of what he said is proven.

Frankly I would prefer the opinion of someone who knows what they are talking about rather than someone who plays competitively and the most that they offer to a conversion is "MK's Dtilt>everything Sonic has", DDD ***** Marth.


I just noticed your post about numbers.
We both know the numbers do not take into account the real life factors because those factors are impossible to measure. mindgames, experience, morale of the player etc etc.
So you really cannot get annoyed with thme.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

We had this issue before. The main problem with the D3 vs Marth match-up is not that Marth has the disadvantage. Nobody ever said so, neither EL nor OS, Atomsk or me...the thing is that many people "consider" a 55/45 to be "even". It's by no means "****" but saying it's even is kinda absurd since 5/5 is even...if somebody has the advantage in a match-up how can it be even?

Personally, I think 6/4 D3s favour is correct though and since top Marths (Neo, Hrnut) and top D3s (atomsk) agree... it confirms my thoughts on this match-up.

@Steel

I always thought you disagree with 6/4? IIRC you were always on the "45/55" side? When did you change your mind?

 

[adumbrodeus]

We had this issue before. The main problem with the D3 vs Marth match-up is not that Marth has the disadvantage. Nobody ever said so, neither EL nor OS, Atomsk or me...the thing is that many people "consider" a 55/45 to be "even". It's by no means "****" but saying it's even is kinda absurd since 5/5 is even...if somebody has the advantage in a match-up how can it be even?

Personally, I think 6/4 D3s favour is correct though and since top Marths (Neo, Hrnut) and top D3s (atomsk) agree... it confirms my thoughts on this match-up.

@Steel

I always thought you disagree with 6/4? IIRC you were always on the "45/55" side? When did you change your mind?

A major part of it is the thread.

Remember the MK match-ups, they said pull a neutral match-up, when asked who, they said yoshi, in his 55-45 glory, and others in similar positions.


It's not really neutral, but a 55-45 is definitely very close. I don't claim to be particularly technically knowledgeable about DDD in general, so I'll depend on some of the more experienced Marths until I can depend on myself to make an accurate estimation.

 

[Yuna]

he thing is that many people "consider" a 55/45 to be "even". It's by no means "****" but saying it's even is kinda absurd since 5/5 is even...if somebody has the advantage in a match-up how can it be even?

50/50 is perfectly neutral/even. 55-45 is even/neutral. But if you wanna anal, then a very slight advantage/disadvantage. But that's just up to preference.

 

[HRNUT (Honey Roasted)]

50/50 is perfectly neutral/even. 55-45 is even/neutral. But if you wanna anal, then a very slight advantage/disadvantage. But that's just up to preference.

if we did a job together and the pay was 100 dollars so i said even split and gave you 45 would you say that its even?

 

[Yuna]

if we did a job together and the pay was 100 dollars so i said even split and gave you 45 would you say that its even?

In the world of Competitive gaming, 55-45 is often considered "neutral". Maybe "even" is the wrong word to use here. "Neutral" is perfectly acceptable. I was wrong in using the word "even".

 

[HRNUT (Honey Roasted)]

In the world of Competitive gaming, 55-45 is often considered "neutral".

Did you answer my question?

 

[Steel]

If 55/45 was even then why wouldn't we just say 50/50?

Marth boards have 55/45 described as "Very Slight Disadvantage"

 

[Yuna]

Did you answer my question?

Did I or did I not say that I was wrong in using the word "even" just now? I never use the word "even" to describe 55-45, I always use "neutral". A slip of the mind randomly have me suddenly use "even" for a few days. That was wrong.

 

[HRNUT (Honey Roasted)]

okay then, but i personally think its 6-4

 

[GofG]

You had better make your next post epic.

 

[Yuna]

okay then, but i personally think its 6-4

I've never claimed to be a Marth expert or an expert on all match-ups in the entire game. If it's 60-40, then it's no longer "Neutral" to me (Neutral, to me (and it's just a preference) extends from 50-50 to 55-45).

 

[HRNUT (Honey Roasted)]

I've never claimed to be a Marth expert or an expert on all match-ups in the entire game. If it's 60-40, then it's no longer "Neutral" to me (Neutral, to me (and it's just a preference) extends from 50-50 to 55-45).

i like the way your sounding, i'm glad you're not another stubborn ****** on smashboards, well yeah on a high level of play, D3 wins alot, however marth can possibly win if he plays extra careful/gay and campy

 

[GofG]

i like the way your sounding, i'm glad you're not another stubborn ****** on smashboards, well yeah on a high level of play, D3 wins alot, however marth can possibly win if he plays extra careful/gay and campy

What kind of a stupid post #1337 is this?

:'(

 

[Sesshomuronay]

I think every character except metaknight should be banned.

 

[Eddie G]

I think every character except metaknight should be banned.

But then we would be left with this.

 

[Ulevo]

People with numbers make me full of rage.

I'm with Overswarm on this. Trying to justify numbers as a means to represent a match up is more arbitrary than attempting to argue who in fact has an advantage, and therefor is a waste of time.

Dedede has an advantage on Marth, I believe most people experienced with either character or the match up can attest to this. They also go fairly even within the match up, and the match can really go either way, depending on skill level of the players at hand and the stage counter picks. This is a fair agreement.

So why are we overly concerned with what the number ratios are, or what they're supposed to represent, if it is already agreed upon as to how well each character performs?

 

[Yuna]

But then we would be left with this.

Spoiler

Yes, but at least then we'd be able to shut up those twits yapping about banning a jillion things since "skill" to be the most deciding factor.

With only Meta Knight in the game, it will truly be about who is the most skilled player, character choice no longer playing any part in the equation.

 

[TreK]

yeah, but i'd be boring.

10thousandsfairs.

 

[OverLade]

Dedede vs. Marth is an extremely gay matchup for marth.

D3 gimps marth so hard, and his grab range means EVERYTHING has to be perfectly spaced or you'll get *****. I'd say 60/40 Marth's disadvantage.

 

[ShadowLink84]

I'm with Overswarm on this. Trying to justify numbers as a means to represent a match up is more arbitrary than attempting to argue who in fact has an advantage, and therefor is a waste of time.

i'll have to disagree. The number ratios provide the most accurate method of determining the extent to whch a character has an advantage. Otherwise, no one would agree to how much of an advantage, they would say he has an advantage but what exactly?
So thats where the matchup ratios come in and would dictate the overall outcome of those two characters battling.

I guess its more of a convenience. *shrug*

 

[rehab]

Dedede vs. Marth is an extremely gay matchup for marth.

By Marth standards, anyway.

 

[Nic64]

i'll have to disagree. The number ratios provide the most accurate method of determining the extent to whch a character has an advantage. Otherwise, no one would agree to how much of an advantage, they would say he has an advantage but what exactly?

a lot of people would already disagree with what are prominent match up ratio's, it does help to give a rough idea of what you think the extent of advantage is but the more specific you get the more opinionated it all is.

 

[adumbrodeus]

So why are we overly concerned with what the number ratios are, or what they're supposed to represent, if it is already agreed upon as to how well each character performs?

Because there's a noticable difference between, "this character performs a tiny bit better then this character in this match-up, the amortized win rate should be very close to 50%", and "this character should win well over two thirds of the amortized matches between the two", and "this character should win every match-up where the player isn't seriously impared, as in on acid, totally drunk, or dead, when these two characters face each other".


Those ARE differences in performance, they are substantive, and they need some sort of quantification because THAT allows people to make informed character decisions.

 

[salaboB]

Because there's a noticable difference between, "this character performs a tiny bit better then this character in this match-up, the amortized win rate should be very close to 50%", and "this character should win well over two thirds of the amortized matches between the two", and "this character should win every match-up where the player isn't seriously impared, as in on acid, totally drunk, or dead, when these two characters face each other".


Those ARE differences in performance, they are substantive, and they need some sort of quantification because THAT allows people to make informed character decisions.

It sounds like "neutral" "slight disadvantage" "disadvantaged" "soft countered" and "hard countered" would be enough. When the numbers vary so much by interpretation (Some people toss things around like "No bad matchups" because the worst someone has is 60:40, others consider that a bad matchup. Same issues with 55:45, some call it even while others call it slight disadvantage -- which is where it should go given the list of labels I included, because it is simply a slight disadvantage. The biggest problem with the numbers is that nobody can quite agree what they represent when they use other terms along with the numbers.)

 

[Eddie G]

Yes, but at least then we'd be able to shut up those twits yapping about banning a jillion things since "skill" to be the most deciding factor.

With only Meta Knight in the game, it will truly be about who is the most skilled player, character choice no longer playing any part in the equation.

In all honesty, people are never going to shut up, there will always be opposition for everything, we are only human after all. If it truly required that much to "shut people up", then the game itself would not be worth playing. Yes, it is true that skill would be the ultimate deciding factor if the game were changed in that way, but the repetition would eventually become too overwhelming for most to handle, resulting in very few people playing the game anyway. A vicious cycle, I know.

 

[St. Viers]

would it be worth the back room perhaps coming up with a unified x:y matchup = set words? Sounds like the sort of decision that they should be making, actually--it's a non tournie specific issue that directly relates to how people analyze the game.

Also, it's trivial, and won't cause huge fighting, I hope.

But pretty much:

50:50---even
45:55---light disadvantage
40:60---disadvantage
35:65---heavy disadvantage
30:70---soft counter
25:75---counter
20:80---hard counter
15:85---extreme counter
10:90---mostly unwinnable
05:95---nearly unwinnable
0:100---unwinnable

Is the way I see it.
To me, disadvantaged meaning harder to deal with, while still allowing for similarly skilled players to have a good match. When we get to countering, it means that one toon has a distinct advantage over the other toon, but an advantage a more skilled player can overcome. When it hits unwinnable, the toon outright shuts down the other character completely, and only a huge gap in skill/mistakes can allow for the other toon to win.


Example of:
even: dittos
slight dis/advantage: MK and Diddy
disadvantage: DDD and Marth
heavy disadvantage: Cap Falcon and most of the cast
soft counter: can't think of good example
counter: G&W and Snake
hard counter: Marth and Ness
extreme counter: Pikachu and Fox
mostly unwinnable: DDD and DK, with infinate grabs allowed
nearly unwinnable: MK vs pikminless olimar
unwinnable: MK w/ IDC vs everyone

 

[ShadowLink84]

Switch your soft and heavy.
A heavy disadvantage implies it being more than something that is soft.

 

[brinboy789]

heavy disadvantage: Cap Falcon and most of the cast
soft counter: can't think of good example

soft counter would be like MK > yoshi 45:55

and lol at falcon

 

[St. Viers]

Switch your soft and heavy.
A heavy disadvantage implies it being more than something that is soft.

that's like saying a B- is lower than a C+, because plus implies greater. I explain what I me by disadvantage, as opposed to counter ^_^

 

[ShadowLink84]

that's like saying a B- is lower than a C+, because plus implies greater. I explain what I me by disadvantage, as opposed to counter ^_^

No its the other way around.
The word light is associated with lacking weight.
Soft is gentle, not harsh. A feather is associated with being light and soft.
Heavy implies great weight. A rock whcih is heavy and rough and painful.

So when you are saying
light
heavy
soft

Then ordering it from light to heavy, your usage of the word is incorrect.

Fix it before I bite your head off or something.

 

[salaboB]

The other part of the problem with numbers is that some people say it's win percent -- 70:30 means at equal skills, the advantaged will take 7 out of 10 matches. Other people say that 70:30 means you have to suck to ever lose. These definitions are not compatible.

 

[St. Viers]

@Shadow. No. Even, disadvantage, counter, unwinnable are like a, b, c, d, f. Heavy, light, and "_" are like the +, -, and base.

So because a soft counter is a counter, it doesn't matter that it's after heavy disadvantage, because under my (as explained below), it being in a counter class means that it's automatically tougher than disadvantage.

I don't see your confusion.

@Salabob, that's why I think we should have a unified guideline (made by SBR or something)

 

[Eddie G]

I think you all are diving into data just a little too much. The better player will win.

*puts up flame shield and rebuttal armor*

 

[salaboB]

@Salabob, that's why I think we should have a unified guideline (made by SBR or something)

Yeah, I was just pointing out another thing that would need addressing with it that I hadn't seen mentioned yet.

 

[St. Viers]

ah, well the problem is that %s of skill are all completely unmeasurable, so people who advocate that particular measuring method are idiots =P

@kingbeef. Unfortunately, that isn't the case.

 

[Eddie G]

One can hope for it to be. I was never one to put too much faith in numbers. It could be a strength or a flaw, it depends.

 

[ShadowLink84]

@Shadow. No. Even, disadvantage, counter, unwinnable are like a, b, c, d, f. Heavy, light, and "_" are like the +, -, and base.

So because a soft counter is a counter, it doesn't matter that it's after heavy disadvantage, because under my (as explained below), it being in a counter class means that it's automatically tougher than disadvantage.

I don't see your confusion.

Its more of an issue in that when I hear soft and then counter, the soft preceding it automatically makes me think of light. So whenI see something above it that says heavy, it gets rather confusing. @_@

I can understand your intention but it still becomes rather confusing.