Thanks to MK's capabilities, players can choose whether or not to plank. They are under no pressure, it actually all does depend on what the player feels he will do better with. Some people prefer turning the tides and keeping the small lead by planking, while others prefer to just get things over with rather than wait 7 minutes, just regrabbing the ledge 5 times (gliding under the stage every once in a while), then touching ground, rinse and repeat.
Which has nothing to do with ban criteria.
metaknight can do it.
The player has no issue at all performing the ask when they attempt it.
So again, whats your point?
Everything is player dependent by that logic.
I know, that's my point. Out of the whole cast, people pick him out, not because he has one advantage over DDD, but many advantages and no notable disadvantages. Sonic has a couple of disadvantages that doesn't concern DDD (like killing options), as do Olimar and Falco (recovery). MK has none.
Why are you going off on another tangent?
Why are you jumping from character matchups to character faults.
What does this have to do with character matchups and their relation to MK stopping planking and camping? Which is what we were talking about at this part of the argument?
Hence player-dependant. Some players would rather do something else. You don't see every MK main planking when they gain % leads.
Irrelevant. It is something the character ca perform. Again what is your point? how does this relate to anything said earlier?
He was debated, and they ended up agreeing that Akuma would be better off banned. If they had the option of "banning or not", then they ended up voting... Unless a single person was the one to say he had to be banned.
if one single person said, ban Akuma from SF2, and everyone else said dont ban him.
he would be banned.
Would this change the fact that Akuma is a rapetastic character?
No.
Which is why when they debated, they PROVED him ban worthy. People don't need to agree they need to prove the opposing side wrong.
I put stuff to keep it short.
Again what are you arguing other than adding to what i said earlier?
He's won A LOT, but he's also lost A LOT. Seems rather non-bannable to me, which is great, since you're anti-ban too, so we're both on the same page.
Other part was irrelevant and I cannot udnerstand as to why you are basically agreeing with my statement.
You will always have more newbs than pros.
if I play m2k, he will 3 stock me if he is serious.
Meanwhile, I can beat an average MK user with my Sonic in tournament play.
you have tons of players using different characters get eliminated because they are not good.
hence why people make a big deal about who is winning with who, because you need to be high level to win. Usually.
Who is being eliminated means nothing compared to who is winning.
So, you're telling me that people are attracted to games because they want the rewards, rather than being attracted at the thought of having some enjoyable moments?
Did i not just say COMPETETIVE play?
They dont just play for fun, they play for money and when things are legal they will use it. Cause they want to win.
Simple.
Hence why ban criteria does not involve fun. Fun is subjective.
PlayToWin IS a large part of the competitive scene, but enjoying it also has its place in it.
True but it has no place in ban criteria.
it is true that enjoyment does play a part into why people want a character banned as, in some wahy, part of why they justify the banning.
However, from an objective point of view, it is to maximize the amount of options avilable. The ability to show more skill.
If we play Akuma vs Akuma, the only skill being shown is that of one character. You do not get to see the skill of players using other characters that fit their playstyle.
Because some of my arguments aren't directed at pointing out the criterias for a ban!
Which is meaningless cause that is what I am addressing considering you onstantly mention people not doing well against MK as if it contributes to Mk being ban worthy or not.
They're made to show the people who whine that MK is unbeatable, that Mk is ACTUALLY beatable, and that there's proof in the tourney results! That's the sad thing about the internet... Things get mixed up too quickly.
being beatable is not just enough. its how beatable they are.
Akuma is theoretically beatable, but he is unrealistically difficult to beat.
You find your argument sound because of your logic, I find my argument sound because of MY logic, and they find their arguments sound because of THEIR logic. Hence the persuasion...
You are automatically assuming their logic though.
You are automatically assuming those who cannot beat MK currently want him banned.
You are making an assumption of the opponent which has no relation to the debate.
So I guess they beat MKs and are still proban, huh? They outsmarted their opponent, or their opponent underestimated them, or theuir opponents didn't know the matchup, etc etc... Whatever reason, they feel like next time it won't go so well for them. Knowing that MK can punish just about anything he wants, makes people want to ban him, since there is no exact safe way to approach.
Ninjalink has taken several matches from m2k ater playing him in tournaments.
Shouldn't have sai malcolm though, it makes him seem pro ban and I don't think he is.
Point of the matter though is that just because someone beats the best m2k, doesnt mean they are going to change their mind, some, like KID, fee it enforces the ban.
Since they are beating the player and not the character.
So, should we ban M2K for being too good?
I advocate this idea.
Hence the "he outskilled his opponents by a lot".
Which has no place in ban criteria.
Decent MKs lose against better people playingother characters besides MKs.
Had to add to it.
So do Good MKs, and apparently, top-level MKs, if M2K lost to NinjaLink. This by itself shows that MK doesn't follow Akuma's steps.
THat is completely unreasonable.
Ecept you are using the player as justification to prove he isnt ban worthy.
You arent addressing the characters capabilities as being lesser.
you forget that those players are human, they make mistakes, they may not be playing their best, etc etc.
Hence why you cannot use such examples by themselves.
That is a double edged argument.
That goes for Akuma.
Skill less Akuma<Balrog
It goes both ways.
What matter sis how badly the CHARACTER hurts the game.
Not how the player fails to make that characters abilities known.
Ice Climbers were amazing in melee, but they're not a good example of what I'm trying to say, because their infinites, even though they took forever to perfect, they took too much time and patience to learn... Plus, their infinites could be evaded if you knew how they set up for them.
Correct which means?
Nope.
if the infinite cannot be avoided, it is banned straight out just like IDC.
hence why I mentioned the IC's.
If there was a character whose unbeatable infinite combo depended on actions taken on a SINGLE FRAME out of the whole attack, it's still a character trait. Would it make the character bannable, even if his infinite was absurdly hard to implement, not to mention impossible to use as stalling purposes?
Its impossible to say its not stalling.
MvC2 has damage scaling so its impossible to not get caught stalling with Magneto.
As long as it is possible, peolpe will learn it.
if the infinite is a problem, it gets banned if nothing can be done in the face of it.
Some people argue that Diddy in FD is 50/50. Sounds even to me, even if the MK DOES strike FD whenever possible... Doesn't mean it won't randomly appear as a neutral and earn the diddy the first game.
Its called stage striking for a reason.
You can stage strike and ban (usually).
Let alone that lee argued why he felt it isnt even. I won't debate that though, im not good with diddy. @_@
Some people want to ban MK for his planking potential, whereas not many MKs even plank, because they DECIDE not to. By deciding, you make a decision. What your decision is depends on YOU. YOU are the player. Therefore, planking is a player-dependent decision.
planking is banned outright.
Its not cause they don't want to plank.
Look at plank!
if planking was completely legal you think he would not do it?
Why do you think large tournaments ban it?
If there is money on the line people will do what is the best route for winning.
be it planking, IDC, etc etc.
Who cares its playing to win.
There is no honor in competitive gaming.
If its legal they WILL do it.
Let alone this does nothing for ban criteria and its starting to get on my paience.
Cuz I just wanted to use a bit of what you said, so you knew what I was replying to. Unlike YOU, who quote and write "stuff" and "other stuff", whcih for people like me, make it hard for us figuring out what you're answering to.
Apologies then, I do not like it when I quote large things with small replies.
I will cease using stuff from hence forth when speaking with you then.
Because my arguments weren't about "banning requirements", they were about people saying "MK is unbeatable, he should be banned!".
That works into being ban criteria.
if a character is unbeatable, he is ban worthy.
Yet all of your posts revolve around "get better you're just not doing things right."
Well, all you decide to post here are criticisms against people's points, whether or not they're talking about ban criteria. All I see you doing is trying to fit "MK isn't broken and unbeatable!" pieces into "MK isn't ban-worthy!" puzzles.'
LOL really? Then you obviously have not understood what i have been saying amidst your own thoughts.
You are trying to dispel the notion of MK being broken and unbeatable, by talking about how the player is failing to beat the character.
Now on how the character is beatable for such and such reasons.
Which is why I jumped on your case earlier a few pages back.
Read it, you are addressing how the player is not doing it right which is why he wants MK banned.
Which is meaningless because it does not talk about the argument but the person behind it.
They're flawed to people with different logics than mine, whereas to me, they might be weak at some points, but they all make perfect sense to me. Same as you and your logic... If life was so simple that everyone would see the same things as others are seeing, we wouldn't have so many problems in this world of ours.
Doesn't matter if their logic differs from yours. You try to prove their logic as being flawed with your own.
Keep ripping up arguments.
Will do.
It's up to them whether they defend their points, or accept defeat and let you correct them. Me, I'm defending my point, because I started out talking about people who whine about MK being too broken and unbeatable, whereas you dragged me further and further towards the "MK doesn't fit the ban criteria" part of the thread.
Which is where you should be.
Why are you arguing about people whining about MK, when the topic is about Mk being ban worthy or not?
of course I'll drag you back to the topic, because talking about whiners and their reasoning doesn't mean a **** thing.
So tell me, what does someone whining about MK, have to do with him being ban worthy or not?
What does talking about the person behind the argument do to the argument?
Does it change their points?
Does it refute them?
its just one big argumentum ad hominem.
Arguing against the man behind the argument. Not the validity of his argument.
