Should Metaknight be Banned? ***Take 3***

[swordgard]

1. MK's Glide. Long glidetoss? Yes. Extends the range of the banana? Yes. Game breaking at all? No. Diddy's glidetoss is perfect for bananas. MK's is easier to see coming, and most of the time it's user you're either far away from MK which you can easily see coming and block it with a shield or something of the sort, or you're a close distance away to MK which he just slides past you unable to do anything really. MK can't banana lock due to his glide toss, he can't combo as well, he can't punish as well, in fact it's probably better to do a dashing banana throw instead, it's even crappy to do a retreating glide toss simply because you can start peanut spamming afterward, lol.

2. His Dash attack. His dash attack is good and is probably one of the best for banana use, but it's still nowhere near Diddy's. Isn't it a 1 frame advantage on Diddy's dash attack and comes out on frame 3 I think, fastest dash attack in the game and simply flows together with the bananas much better than MKs.

3. I've versed some pretty good MKs in my time, some much better than me. But I'm pretty sure not 1 has EVER been able to control BOTH of the bananas for more than a few seconds. It's unlikely that MK will even get 1 banana under his control for more than a few seconds, but BOTH of them? Very unlikely. So scenario: MK has 1 banana in his control, Diddy has 1 banana in his control...who do you think will win this little banana war? 'Nuff said.

4. that z drop thing was stupid, scenario rarely happens and is easy to avoid even once you're in it.

Hey, my ics were doing a pretty decent job at staying in controll of the bananas after i switched to anti-diddy mode Sorry for double post.

 

[Nic64]

I don't think ADHD or yourself have beaten M2K to date.

NL beat M2K sending him into the loser's bracket because of a momentum defining point in their match (a 0-death gimp due to Diddy's face hump into an almost guaranteed footstool). M2K went on to win the tournament.

NL beat M2K once before that, also M2K didn't win he split with DSF and was listed second IIRC

and wow what an amazing list lol

 

[AvaricePanda]

lol

M2K is like an outlier or something.

MKs=Plural. M2K=Singular.

List of MKs (Plural) that Atomsk, ADHD can't beat.

Oh yeah, and stop avoiding points, Dekar. You still have yet to say anything about MK making other characters invalid. That point has been refuted and you still have yet to back it up.

 

[Player-1]

Name one person who hasn't had trouble with the very first time they played against a good Diddy. Then name the person who went on (in the same tourney) to beat said Diddy player in that very same tourney: M2K.

For those who will ignore what was edited into my prior post-

NL beat M2K sending him into the loser's bracket because of a momentum defining point in their match (a 0-death gimp due to Diddy's face hump into an almost guaranteed footstool). M2K went on to win the tournament.

M2K didn't win, it was a split between NL, M2K, and DSF. All 3. And in case you didn't know, NL also beat M2K at another tournament I can't seem to remember.

 

[Kewkky]

Name one person who hasn't had trouble with the very first time they played against a good Diddy. Then name the person who went on (in the same tourney) to beat said Diddy player in that very same tourney: M2K.

For those who will ignore what was edited into my prior post-

NL beat M2K sending him into the loser's bracket because of a momentum defining point in their match (a 0-death gimp due to Diddy's face hump into an almost guaranteed footstool). M2K went on to win the tournament.

For the record, M2K split the prize with NL and someone else. And diddy's monkey flip footstooling M2K shows how NL was thinking outside the box. It doesn't mean he got lucky, it means he outsmarted M2K by grabbing him with Diddy offstage, then mashing the jump button in order to footstool him when he did.

Whatever your answer is, this is an example of a Diddy beating an MK... Where was the banana control? If MK had the most control, then CLEARLY MK would've won, right? One example is enough to disprove your statement of Diddy vs MK being impossible. Plus, you're using M2K, the best player, as an example. He's called "The Best Player" and not "The Best Character" for a reason. If you want to use someone else as an example, choose Tyrant or something. He's still up there with the top MKs.

PS: Yeah, NL beat M2K two times (not degrading M2K or anything, it's just that we're using them as an example).

 

[Yuna]

id like to know what you think on one thing. Pro-ban has been saying that the lower end of the metagame counts and if MK is overcentralizing there it counts as much as if he is at the top. I argued that if any character is overcentralizing, it only matters at the top of the metagame, aka i wouldnt give a shiz if he dominated 75% of the lower part if no MK broke the top 25%. Do you agree or not? Id like the view of a veteran player on this.

Yes, I do agree. Who gives a Japanese ***** (because apparently the average Japanese ***** is 3.5 inches in length) how well MK destroys the ****tiest characters in the game? They are already ****ty. They are already getting destroyed by one jillion other characters. MK is just one in a long line of people with huge *****es their tiny *****es will never be able to beat in the bizzare *****-based game that is SSBB. Even if we ban MK, the Japanese ***** characters will still be getting utterly destroyed by any number of S, A and B tiers.

Edit: Wait, what, the P-word for the male genitalia is censored now?! Aw man!

And yeah, dekarr, inui doesnt date ****. Besides the fact that he had legit sex, hes ***** countless players like you before, your not the first nor will you be the last.

I tourney ****. I grope people at tournaments. And get away with it. Two of them ended up dating me. One of them was and remains straight. I'm just that awesome.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

If 27 characters can top 8 at national tournaments, with or without secondaries, I can't see how the diversity argument can stand.

If MK was dominating that badly, shouldn't we be seeing less characters topping.

 

[Yuna]

If 27 characters can top 8 at national tournaments, with or without secondaries, I can't see how the diversity argument can stand.

If MK was dominating that badly, shouldn't we be seeing less characters topping.

Hush! The logic, facts and pure win might make their heads explode. On second thought, keep repeating this argument.

I don't know where you're getting the number 27 from, though. 27 characters are not Top 8:ing at national (U.S.) tournaments.

 

[Dekar173]

Which of you is willing to play as

Mario
Luigi
Bowser
Samus
ZSS
CF
Ganon
Fox
Ike
Link
Ness
Marth
Pit
ROB
PT
Sheik
Wolf

any of the above against a good MK?

When's a recent occurrence of M2K losing to a Diddy player?

NL lucked out and used something that could never be used again, unless if the MK makes a mistake.

 

[Kewkky]

Which of you is willing to play as

Mario
Luigi
Bowser
Samus
ZSS
CF
Ganon
Fox
Ike
Link
Ness
Marth
Pit
ROB
PT
Sheik
Wolf

any of the above against a good MK?

When's a recent occurrence of M2K losing to a Diddy player?

NL lucked out and used something that could never be used again, unless if the MK makes a mistake.

I'd use ZSS. :D

When's a recent occurence of you actually reading the posts? M2K is the best player, choose a different example.

 

[Player-1]

Which of you is willing to play as

Mario
Luigi
Bowser
Samus
ZSS
CF
Ganon
Fox
Ike
Link
Ness
Marth
Pit
ROB
PT
Sheik
Wolf

any of the above against a good MK?

Reflex took a game off M2K with PT, and I believe I remember hearing from M2K (correct me if I'm wrong, and it was a while ago) that M2K had the most trouble with Ninjalink and SNAKEEE (ZSS player). Azen also proved that Fox was viable after Cat3. Bowser actually does decent against MK truth be told. And LOL, I see some of those characters beat MKs ALL the time, just not M2K's MK.

and lol, half of those aren't tournament viable already because of other bad matchups they have with other chars

Edit: nighty night, more debates with dumb-dumbs in the morning

 

[.AC.]

Which of you is willing to play as

Mario
Luigi
Bowser
Samus
ZSS
CF
Ganon
Fox
Ike
Link
Ness
Marth
Pit
ROB
PT
Sheik
Wolf

any of the above against a good MK?

When's a recent occurrence of M2K losing to a Diddy player?

NL lucked out and used something that could never be used again, unless if the MK makes a mistake.

m2k not losing to a certain character doesnt mean that character is broken it just means m2k is just good enough to not lose to these chars.besides even f mk is banned those chars still have matchups in which they get *****.diversity will only increase by very little.

 

[thrillagorilla]

Found it, Yuna.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7274122&postcount=3511

This is your rebuttal to the criteria, though keep in mind it was based on Eyada's original draft and he has a new one.

The responses to your post are here.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7274214&postcount=3512

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7274222&postcount=3513

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7274905&postcount=3524

If nothing else comes out of this debate, I want good ban criteria that easily applies to smash. If its not good enough yet, keep working on it until it is.

Hush! The logic, facts and pure win might make their heads explode.

Was that REALLY necessary?

Edit: I know you aren't the only one, but still...

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
I wish he had put Lucario on that list, so I could have said I use him to **** MetaKnight's all the time . But then again, I can't really claim to use him as like a hidden-weapon, since he's my main. The Aura flows through me. I used to think (and still do think) that Lucario is probably a good even match against Metaknight (although the boards completely disagree with me on that one), but still, Metaknight doesn't exactly cripple him now does he?

Against a Metaknight, I'm fine with giving Pit a try, and I don't see what would be bad in using Ike against him either.... or ZSS.... or Bowser... or... wow.. lots of people on that list can do well against Metaknight. But trying to make M2K the Metaknight isn't exactly fair... I mean, who beats M2K? M2K has no counter-picks.... M2K has no disadvantaged matchups.... M2K makes all other characters worthless... OMG! WHEN PEOPLE DESCRIBE METAKNIGHT, THEY REALLY MEAN M2K! I JUST GOT IT!
:flame:

 

[aeghrur]

lol@yuna groping atomsk. xD

 

[Player-1]

we should just ban using M2K as an example from this thread, he's too good.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
How would you ban Smash Bros' Master? How on Earth do you do that? Is that Possible? I'm certainly not going to try... he hears everything... he knows everything... he's like Santa, only he gives good kids Coal, and Bad Kids get a butt-kicking. Wait... everyone's bad then... ;.;
:flame:

 

[Master Raven]

Bowser.

Player-1, I don't think Fox is viable vs MK, M2K might've lacked the matchup experience then.

 

[Melomaniacal]

:flame:
I wish he had put Lucario on that list, so I could have said I use him to **** MetaKnight's all the time . But then again, I can't really claim to use him as like a hidden-weapon, since he's my main. The Aura flows through me. I used to think (and still do think) that Lucario is probably a good even match against Metaknight (although the boards completely disagree with me on that one), but still, Metaknight doesn't exactly cripple him now does he?

Against a Metaknight, I'm fine with giving Pit a try, and I don't see what would be bad in using Ike against him either.... or ZSS.... or Bowser... or... wow.. lots of people on that list can do well against Metaknight. But trying to make M2K the Metaknight isn't exactly fair... I mean, who beats M2K? M2K has no counter-picks.... M2K has no disadvantaged matchups.... M2K makes all other characters worthless... OMG! WHEN PEOPLE DESCRIBE METAKNIGHT, THEY REALLY MEAN M2K! I JUST GOT IT!
:flame:

Yeah, but how many reputable MKs have you played? I'm not trying to insult you, but it doesn't mean much if the only MKs you have played are mediocre randoms.

 

[Inui]

Which of you is willing to play as

Mario
Luigi
Bowser
Samus
ZSS
CF
Ganon
Fox
Ike
Link
Ness
Marth
Pit
ROB
PT
Sheik
Wolf

any of the above against a good MK?

When's a recent occurrence of M2K losing to a Diddy player?

NL lucked out and used something that could never be used again, unless if the MK makes a mistake.

I beat teh_spamerer and dmbrandon with Marth in tourny in matches/sets more than once.

With most of those characters, I'd rather fight MK than Falco or Dedede.

In fact...MK is the worst for ROB, Peach, and Marth...and then nothing else on that list.

MK makes nothing unviable.

 

[meepxzero]

we should call mk m2k from now on *rolls eyes*

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

Yeah, but how many reputable MKs have you played? I'm not trying to insult you, but it doesn't mean much if the only MKs you have played are mediocre randoms.

:flame:
Thank you for making me feel emo, Melo. You ruined my.... mellow.... I'm going to go cut myself now, thank you.

One of my friends is a good Metaknight Main, actually. He mained him at the Brawl-Prerelease tournament, and I'm trying to get him to come online on SmashBoards, since he's really good. But he might have to use G&W more, since people are a little Meta-Paranoid.

But honestly, people really do compare MetaKnight as some unstopable Deity, when it turns out they really mean M2K!
:flame:

 

[Palpi]

Which of you is willing to play as

Mario
Luigi
Bowser
Samus
ZSS
CF
Ganon
Fox
Ike
Link
Ness
Marth
Pit
ROB
PT
Sheik
Wolf

any of the above against a good MK?

When's a recent occurrence of M2K losing to a Diddy player?

NL lucked out and used something that could never be used again, unless if the MK makes a mistake.

For one thing M2k isn't only the best MK he is pretty much the best player. Ninjalink and ADHD have consistantly overcome top MKs. Just because there is one that always doesn't mean anything if there is still top MK's losing to top diddys.

Several of those characters are not tournament viable with or without metaknight.

 

[DemonFart]

:flame:

Against a Metaknight, I'm fine with giving Pit a try, and I don't see what would be bad in using Ike against him either.... or ZSS.... or Bowser... or... wow.. lots of people on that list can do well against Metaknight. But trying to make M2K the Metaknight isn't exactly fair... I mean, who beats M2K? M2K has no counter-picks.... M2K has no disadvantaged matchups.... M2K makes all other characters worthless... OMG! WHEN PEOPLE DESCRIBE METAKNIGHT, THEY REALLY MEAN M2K! I JUST GOT IT!
:flame:

That's what Maxfire would say. Ike beats MK in the prima guide. Rofl...

Yeah...Most people use M2K as an example of Metaknight.

 

[Dekar173]

I beat teh_spamerer and dmbrandon with Marth in tourny in matches/sets more than once.

With most of those characters, I'd rather fight MK than Falco or Dedede.

In fact...MK is the worst for ROB, Peach, and Marth...and then nothing else on that list.

MK makes nothing unviable.

A player can pick MK and expect to dominate, a player can pick D3 and have the possibility of running into a Falco, or oh no! an MK. AKA- unfavorable match-ups. MK doesn't have to fear this. Anyone on that list though, must worry about running into someone who mains MK, or any of their other extremely skewed match-ups.

The least banning MK will do is create more diversity. Another, better, side effect of such will be a healthier gaming community (as I stated earlier,) even further still, those who are "playing to win" won't feel pressured to switch mains.

 

[AvaricePanda]

A player can pick MK and expect to run into some even matchups, that if they don't actually know said matchups, they lose.

MK doesn't get a free-win boat.

Banning MK will create more diversity, but so would banning Snake. While MKs points on Ankoku's list is almost double Snake's, Snake's points is more than double D3s. According to the whole diversity argument, banning Snake is also beneficial to tournament diversity.

A healthier gaming community is really vague, and Inui has already disproving it. Banning MK in NJ would hinder the community because they have a lot of top MKs there. The statement is not only vague, but it doesn't directly apply to the entire community.

Those who are playing to win don't have to switch mains. They can use a secondary. And oh hey, against most top characters except for Marth, MK is not the best option for a secondary. Nobody HAS to switch to MK, nobody even has to secondary MK.

Plus, you haven't stated what makes MK banworthy in the first place. The effects of banning MK really don't matter if he's banworthy. While banning Snake will bring more diversity, it's a stupid idea, and I'm pretty sure most of SWF will agree: Snake isn't banworthy in the first place. What makes MK banworthy?

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

A player can pick MK and expect to dominate, a player can pick D3 and have the possibility of running into a Falco, or oh no! an MK. AKA- unfavorable match-ups. MK doesn't have to fear this. Anyone on that list though, must worry about running into someone who mains MK, or any of their other extremely skewed match-ups.

The least banning MK will do is create more diversity. Another, better, side effect of such will be a healthier gaming community (as I stated earlier,) even further still, those who are "playing to win" won't feel pressured to switch mains.

:flame:
I thought the Ice-Climbers were up and away worse to deal with that M2K or Falco, atleast in King ADD's case. Metaknight doesn't fear a bad matchup (except some of them that are theoried to be against his favor, although they are just theories), but most people don't really get specifically slaughtered by M2K. There are usually other characters that do it much harder.

And how is it going to be more diverse again? The same top-tier characters will still be dominating the mid and low tiers, except that there will be one less to use....
:flame:

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Hush! The logic, facts and pure win might make their heads explode. On second thought, keep repeating this argument.

I don't know where you're getting the number 27 from, though. 27 characters are not Top 8:ing at national (U.S.) tournaments.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7281301&postcount=3633

 

[Inui]

A player can pick MK and expect to dominate, a player can pick D3 and have the possibility of running into a Falco, or oh no! an MK. AKA- unfavorable match-ups. MK doesn't have to fear this. Anyone on that list though, must worry about running into someone who mains MK, or any of their other extremely skewed match-ups.

Eddie has no bad matches in Guilty Gear, but nobody wants to ban him.

Sagat has no bad matches in SF4, but nobody wants to ban him.

Fox has no bad matches in Melee, but nobody wants to ban him.

Pikachu has no bad matches in Smash 64, but nobody wants to ban him.

Hilde has no bad matches in SC4 and has death combos, but she's allowed.

Having no bad matches is not something banworthy.

 

[Santi]

WHOAH WHOAH WHOAH.......
Inui...

can't Pikachu 64 be a girl too?

 

[Gnes]

This thread has gotten good.

Dekar-Inui beat me at WHOBO, though i was playing pretty bad(JOHNS lol). Idk if u want to do such a large MM against him. As for your MM with Atomsk, im sorry but i really can't see u winning that. Sorry dude.

100$ in MM's...man...somebodys got money.

Usually on the best of mk's will beat me. As for texas, only Dojo/Infinity. All the rest get eaten.

 

[Kewkky]

Man, I wish I lived in USA... Guess I'll just have to save up heaps of money in order to travel to USA's major tourneys once next college semester starts. There's not much Kirby representation out there, and it makes me sad... Plus I wanna play against most (if not all) the top players, joJOjo! :/

 

[DMG]

Wait until I pick up MK. Super gay Wario translates into Super gay MK.

 

[Yuna]

Stuff.

Yeah, as I said in my reply, I skimmed and had to go to sleep. I misread one of his points as saying basically "We ban things to maximize diversity"... which he didn't... which results in my reply making no sense.

Lack of sleep and skimming (because of lack of sleep) can do that to you.

However, my claim that we do not ban things to maximize diversity still stands, as this is an absolute truth. Because if we did, i.e., if we banned things if them being banned results in a more diverse metagame than before the ban went into effect, we'd ban a lot of characters.

Therefore, we do not ban things to maximize diversity at all! No, this is not true! We ban things which on their own severely limit diversity. This is why we've banned certain tactics (pretty much all of them of the stalling variety) and stages. Because if we allow them, then there would be a severe limitation of diversity.

If we wanted to maximize diversity, we'd ban even more characters than Meta Knight and stages than those which are already banned.

Also, I've been saying this since literally January last year when the "Ban D3's infinite!"-debacle broke out. And what I said then and what I am saying now (the exact same thing) still stands as factual. No, we do not ban things to maximize anything. We ban things which severely limit things.

The one is not the same as the other. Thus, most of the "/* Establishing a justifiable ban criterion under a Competitive Rule Set. /*"-section of Eyada's long post is void.

Please name me anything that was banned to maximize diversity.

CRASHiC brought up banned stages and items. My rebuttal (and keep in mind that this is my standard rebuttal to this argument and it still holds up):
Banned stages: We do not ban stages to maximize Competitive viability. We ban stages for a variety of reasons, all of which boil down to:
* Anti-Competitive.
Elaboration:
- Randomness which can totally turn the tide of the game, case in point: Icicle Mountain, SSBM
- Promotes camping like a mofo (not to be confused with Mofo), case in point: Mushroom Kingdom II in SSBM.
- Gives certain character(s)/tactics way too huge of an advantage (over-centralization of characters/tactics viable on said stage), case in point: any number of stages with permanent walk-offs.
- Gives certain character(s) an auto-win (certain characters on Hyrule Temple, for instance), though this is just the extreme version of criteria #3
- Players fight the stage more than they fight each other, case in point: a jillion stages, such as 75M

Items fall under "Anti-Competitive" because they are random. Not to mention the vast majority of them are over-powered. Why are there no Shadow or Gold tournaments in Guilty Gear XX (pick an XX, any XX) except for ****s and giggles? Same thing. All items are still random at the end of the day, though.

So we ban these stages and all items for being anti-Competitive. However, we do not ban them to maximize Competitive viability. Because banning things to maximize Competitive viability implies, you know, actually banning things to maximize Competitive viability.

And if we're going to take things to the extreme, we're going to have to ban a truckload of more things if we want to ban for the sake of maximizing Competitive viability, most of them under the criteria of "Randomness". Hey, aren't Green Greens and Corneria actually a bit random as well? Well, if we're gonna ban things to maximize Competitive viability, i.e. minimize randomness, they need to go. And Turnip Pluck/Toss and Judgment Hammer and a few other techniques are quite random as well. Ban them or ban the characters which wield said moves!

Also, keep in mind that all of these bans are because of on paper criteria. I mean, we could just not ban Hyrule Temple if everyone promises to not use any of the really broken tactics which exist for that stage. But we won't do that because people Play to Win (I've personally managed to win several tournaments and competitions by simply outsmarting by opponents and using the rules to my advantage, including an eating competition).

And on paper, Meta Knight doesn't severely limit Competitive viability (i.e., being anti-Competitive) nor is he in any way random. He does not fit any of the aforementioned ban criteria. It is only in practice that he limits choose to play as him, not because they need to in order to win but because they wish to have the easiest path to victory.

Keep in mind that this is merely a reply to CRASHiC, not a reply to Eyada. So let me get back to Eyada's criteria. According to Eyada's criteria, whenever criteria 76 and 79 conflict, one must choose the option least damaging to maximum diversity (this is if we're still under the fallacious assumption that we ban things to maximize diversity... which we do not, as I am about to demonstrate).

Well, guess what, Meta Knight is not the only character limiting diversity. In fact, there are several characters which reate 76-vs-79-situations whose solutions are "BAN!" according to "Least damaging to diversity". There are several characters which, if they were gone, will leave behind a metagame more diverse (i.e. maximum diversity!!!) than were they allowed a continued legality in the Competitive Brawl community.

So, in effect, according to Eyada's ban criteria, we have to ban, oh, a good 8 or so characters because with them gone, plenty more (well, more than 8) would become viable. And according to Eyada's assumption that we ban to maximize, even 9 vs. 8 is enough, nay, such a situation requires a ban, since we're, after all, going for maximum diversity!

In fact, the criteria would force us to ban in the case of the following hypothetical scenario:
If by banning characters B, C, D, E, F, G, H we'd make I, J, K, L, M, N, O (7 vs. 7) characters viable, we shouldn't ban. But, if we, in addition to banning B-G also ban A, would render not only P viable but also Q because P and Q happen to have ****ty match-ups against all of B-G in addition to A, then we must ban A-H because we'd get 9 characters in return for "only" 8.

In this scenario, banning B-G (any number of them) would leave us with a total sum of 0 net gain. Banning A by himself or in conjunction with any number of B-G other than all 7 would leave us with a loss. However, banning all of A-G (8 characters) would leave us with a +1 viable character gain. According to Eyada's criteria, this would necessitate a ban since we are, apparently, going for maximum diversity with our banning... only we aren't. And never have. And shouldn't. Ever. Ever, ever. Yes, really. Ever, ever.


*Takes a bow*

Keep in mind it was based on Eyada's original draft and he has a new one.

Please link me to this new draft since I just proved Eyada's original draft fallacious.

Was that REALLY necessary?

Yes. Yes, it was.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

WHOAH WHOAH WHOAH.......
Inui...

can't Pikachu 64 be a girl too?

:flame:
No. That's Ash's Pikachu, unrestrained from his master, ready to unleash his true power. Lucario is also a guy, being the Lucario from :Lucario and the Mystery of Mew.
:flame:

 

[AvaricePanda]

WHOAH WHOAH WHOAH.......
Inui...

can't Pikachu 64 be a girl too?

I lol'd.

10lols

 

[Yuna]

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7281301&postcount=3633

Those are major (though some would disagree on whether or not they are major. I would. I count major by talent represented, not purely on number of entrants. While all of them had 90+ entrants, some might have had a relatively small concentration of skilled players) tournaments, not national tournaments.

27 characters have placed Top 8 at major tournaments since the start of 2009 by Amazing Ampharos' research. Not national tournaments. Because there are quite few national U.S. tournaments.

Eddie has no bad matches in Guilty Gear, but nobody wants to ban him.

Depends on which GG, though.

Sagat has no bad matches in SF4, but nobody wants to ban him.

Fox has no bad matches in Melee, but nobody wants to ban him.

Pikachu has no bad matches in Smash 64, but nobody wants to ban him.

Also, Yun in SF3: 3rd Strike.

And somebody should look into Xianghua's match-ups in SCII and SCIII. Though I main her in both (and SCIV... for the moment), I only know that she was the best character (arguably in III, definitely in II) in both, not how good her match-ups were .

Hilde has no bad matches in SC4 and has death combos, but she's allowed.

Hilde has no bad match-ups (this I do not know for sure, I'll take your word for it) and death combos against everyone (this I'm almost positive about). Let's not forget that simple fact. And said death combos are initiated with one of the fastest moves in the game.

Also, why are we still replying to this Dekar173-guy? Can't we utilize his own "tactic" against him? When he runs into troublesome arguments he cannot refute, he pretends like he didn't see them (despite me pointing them out to him several times) or to be too lazy to dig up the evidence to refute them (lol).

So I say we pretend like we don't see his posts.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
No! In Brawl, you don't get anywhere by just dodging. Power-shield, and then counter his comments! Such a tactic works against several of MetaKnight's moves too!
:flame:

 

[yummynbeefy]

Fox has no bad matches in Melee, but nobody wants to ban him.

well he had a handful of other characters right in that same compartment he has 2 bad matchups btw marth and falco also he had his bad stages

Pikachu has no bad matches in Smash 64, but nobody wants to ban him.

yea this is when every character (exept samus) had a sheild breaker and 0-death combo on everyone same situation

also while u do have valid points metas the only one who has even been CONSIDERED for a ban if hes considered for a ban hes probably banable think about that

 

[Inui]

lmao @ Santi

@Gnes: We both played kinda bad one match each. The last game was the best. Super intense!