Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Here you go, ripped from my AiB profile:@ Inui: Which character do you use?
Just curious.
What obssesion are you talking about. He simply mentioned it with captain falconHe doesn't. I was goign to leave the burden of proof on you, but heck, I'm bored.
Let's say I'm Jigglypuff, on the ground, in front of MK. What are his options?
Dash attack or grab? Dair beats either, but I prefer reading it to shield/dodge and counter-grab, since I'm Jigglypuff. Plus, if I dair too much, he will start baiting them with dashes and jumping into fairs instead.
Up-B? Please, that's just asking to get shield grabbed.
Nado? Lol, a random nado? Please don't argue that this is a legit option, I'm giving you a hint here.
Walk forward? This is his best bet, since I have to either bait a f-tilt chain and roll to grab or pound, or jump and try to take the battle to the air.
This proves nothing how do you shield grab up b. Hell he can running shield to stop your dair counter completly. nair can beat that. Nado if used properly cant be punished by jigglypuff.
Jigglypuff will get ***** in the air despite mks lack of mobility. Heck why are you even using jp against mk pick a different character or GG.
I really don't care, this isn't kickball teams. Someone says something wrong, I'm going to correct them. If someone insists on a wrong point while not having any background to give it validity at all, I'm going to point that out.
I'm not saying bad players or anyone else aren't allowed to have opinions or discuss or have a say in the community. I'm saying that they are in no position to insist things relating to the abstract mechanics of the game when they themselves have no shown any mastery of them.
I have actually agreed with a lot of adambrodus's posts, including in this topic, and think they are well-written. But, on this obsession with priority, he is very misguided.
...Zelda has fantastic priority, as does Ike. I don't see why you are so focused on a singular element of the game that MK isn't even the best in. G&W has the best overall priority.
I hope this doesn't sound personal, but adumbrodeus, your arguments made it clear that you are not a good player at this game. I would money match you for at least $20, with both Jigglypuff and Captain Falcon. A quick Youtube scan seemed to confirmation my speculation and suggest that this would be easy money.
I'm in western Kentucky, so I can only hope that our paths cross at tourney in the South sometime.
But only if you have the proper mitigating attributes to work with. And those mitigating attributes in sufficient quantity are rare.Original point being: good characters can punish quickly given they use an optimal response and deal good damage doing it, and every character hat meets that qualification can punish a higher priority move not by hoping to beat the move with one of theirs, but by selecting the proper response to punish them for being predicted. Watch any given good match and it's not people just spamming priority moves at the right spacing, it's people forcing openings often despite priority.
In an engine far more friendly to him, yes he could work without priority, but this is Brawl. If the engine was friendly to him that'd mean he'd have mitigating attributes which would cover for his lack of priority.Side note: Falcon has never needed priority, because he has always had the ability to force his way in and punish you to hell with high reward options that put the other guy in a terrible position. Hmmmmm given the character attributes he has always had I wonder what happens when you take that, his only outstanding strength away hmmmmmmmm
And what if he plays defense?A jump in is basically an approach. Metaknight has approaches that are safe, damaging and overall hard to deal with, but freaking read him and choose the correct way to punish him (if your character is reasonably good I guarantee you they have an answer of some sort), that's what you have to be trying to do to be better than average at anything competitive
Except that you misunderstood what I was trying to say, I wasn't even suggesting that priority was everything. I was merely pointing out that it was something*. There's a substantial difference, reread what I was responding to and understand where I was coming from.I really don't care, this isn't kickball teams. Someone says something wrong, I'm going to correct them. If someone insists on a wrong point while not having any background to give it validity at all, I'm going to point that out.
Shown mastery of something has nothing to do with abstract knowledge. Nothing whatsoever.I'm not saying bad players or anyone else aren't allowed to have opinions or discuss or have a say in the community. I'm saying that they are in no position to insist things relating to the abstract mechanics of the game when they themselves have no shown any mastery of them.
By the way.Super Smash Brothers Brawl:
SERIOUS BUSINESS.
Yeah, ok. Because i'm sure Kirby, Snake, (one of the worst characters from the ledge get up) Falco, Fox, DDD, and everyone else are amazing at planking. I don't know about you guys but when I hear the word "planking" I certainly don't think of Sonic or Zelda. At WORST other than MK you have Marth or GAW. (on Pokey Stadium) That's about it. I'll bet you anything that the no ledge stall more thna X amount of times in a match was made a good chunk of around 95% for Meta Knight mains. I'm sure all of us could find plenty of footage of MK's running the clock as opposed to other characters. Some of you "think" you have a good idea what you are talking about when in reality, you're just other Meta Knight mains who would go insane to see this character banned.planking = arbitrary thing that applies to everyone, not just MK
@ Inui: Which character do you use?
Just curious.
What do you know? Another Smash Back Room player who USES META KNIGHT. LOL.Here you go, ripped from my AiB profile:
Brawl Characters
Mains: Meta Knight, Snake, Wario
You're just realizing NOW that Inui uses MK, sheesh.What do you know? Another Smash Back Room player who USES META KNIGHT. LOL.
I smell a bit of Politics in the smash back room.
Coughcoughcoughoverswarmcoughcoughmewtwokingcoughcoughcoughsadaharuinui
Why not, if you're right then it positively confirms your side, if you're wrong, you know that you were mistaken and can switch sides, plus if only pro-ban is working on it there's a bigger chance bias can taint it.I want that to-do list of adum's worked on... but of course I won't be doing the work...
Samus and Wolf aside~Space animals and Samus still get ***** by him.
=/AA killed of my entire argument. Then again, what wouldn't you expect from the only person aside from Yuna on the anti-ban side who actually shows a consistent level of intelligence in this thread, imo?
No, he doesn't make some characters completely unviable, he makes no character completely unviable. Even Marth, Peach and R.O.B. still have tournament results, and just because they have to counterpick against Meta Knight in the worst case it doesn't make them completely unviable. Out of these 3 characters, only Marth would have profit from a ban, since Peach and R.O.B. still have hard counters in the roster next to Meta Knight.Meta does damage the metagame, because he makes some characters COMPLETELY inviable.
How? Meta Knight is as hard to master as every other character. The only thing his player is having an easier time is covering his weaknesses with skill. Since Meta Knight has many merits but little flaws, it's easier for him than for Low Tiers, who have more flaws than merits.I voted yes. I'd color MK as not only advanced, but borderline too easy to play.
Cool, if I can get some real support I'm hoping to make it a community project.Adum, that was more or less a "too lazy to do it now" statement than a refusal one.
el oh elWhat do you know? Another Smash Back Room player who USES META KNIGHT. LOL.
I smell a bit of Politics in the smash back room.
Coughcoughcoughoverswarmcoughcoughmewtwokingcoughcoughcoughsadaharuinui
Learning curve is by no means a reason to ban a character.I voted yes. I'd color MK as not only advanced, but borderline too easy to play.
I ain't breaking up this quote man that'd take forever...
You're not quite understanding my point, he's saying priority is meaningless, I'm pointing out that he's missing a major part of the equation when saying that, in Melee Falcon had options to make up for it, plus he had some useful high priority moves.
not quiteGood players don't lose to priority alone
In an engine far more friendly to him, yes he could work without priority, but this is Brawl. If the engine was friendly to him that'd mean he'd have mitigating attributes which would cover for his lack of priority.
I was going to say something about the fact that all his kill moves require setup, preferably a combo to be reasonably good moves but
uh
So are we agreeing or what
And what if he plays defense?
Against characters that metaknight doesn't have a safe approach, he can play defense and poke like Marth, forcing you to come to him. Then he punishes you when you approach.
Predict how he's going to keep you out, get around it and get in, it happens, no johns etc. Are you going to tell me it doesn't?
I was beating down a crazy hyperbole trotted out as fact, I seriously think you were barking up the wrong tree.
and I'm the one telling fantastic stories then? lol
Shown mastery of something has nothing to do with abstract knowledge. Nothing whatsoever.
You're taking zoning to be something like 100% effective all the time when even the best players let other best players in their DANGER zone and pay for it. Smart players predict will get inside and do their damage, zoning is by no means absolute since you are generally going to be outmaneuvering the person you are getting in on, not playing along with "HERE'S MY PRIORITY/RANGE, HERE'S HIS PRIORITY/RANGE, LET'S JAM THEM TOGETHER AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK GEE HIS CHARACTER HAD MORE SO I LOST
I notice this a lot on this subject, like a few pages ago AA made a post clearly outlining, with evidence, how meta knight doesn't overcentralize the meta game at all. pro ban mostly ignores it until it gets burried a bit, then come back the "meta knight has no bad matchups and overcentralizes the meta game because there is no reason not to use him haoihgoajsgh" posts. It's really annoying. Then there are people like POF and Cr4sh who basically do nothing BUT this in this topic. It's really pretty pointless now...*thinks this topic should be closed*Your argument here is basically an appeal to emotion built on top of a lot of whining about how MK is too good.
On top of that, Pierce7d recently switched to anti-ban
what was his reasoning?
****, I was wondering why he hadn't come to the Snake boards and argued that the vs MK matchup is "probably worse than 40:60" yet."I **** MK again"
Pierce is awesome, but his reliance on personal experience rapidly changes his opinion one way or another.
Of the thousands of posts on this subject, this paragraph may actually be the stupidest, scrubbiest, naivest, and most tellingly whiny of them all. Congratulations.Also in regards to the Tornado: he was telling me that there are things you can do against the Tornado. You can angle your shield so that it doesn't shield stab you while defending against it. I don't give a flying crap if I can shlield the whole thing...I shouldnt have to "shield" EVERYTIME to stop a specific move in Smash Brothers. That's bull crap.
The fact that anyone wanted snake banned just shows how silly this community is.which is why I said, "MK is more banworthy" in response to some people asking for a snake ban.
The point is priority is one character attribute, and if you're of even skill and your character lacks priority without attributes to make up for it, you're gonna get destroyed, like Falcon does.not quite
Obviously not, you seem to believe priority is meaningless, it's an important character attribute, it's just not the ONLY attribute, others can cover for it.I was going to say something about the fact that all his kill moves require setup, preferably a combo to be reasonably good moves but
uh
So are we agreeing or what
Don't be an idiot, this is about match-ups, not anyone's ability or lack thereof to beat MK players. This creates significantly disadvantaged match-ups, which will result in players of all skill levels losing to MK when the MK is not a large amount behind in skill level.Predict how he's going to keep you out, get around it and get in, it happens, no johns etc. Are you going to tell me it doesn't?
No, you're the one who's choosing to act like an important character attribute is meaningless because "it's beatable".and I'm the one telling fantastic stories then? lol
Again, generalizations in the aether. It can happen, but superior priority and range often result in a character being unable to reach that zone for the vast majority of the match and dying, even if they're about the same skill level.You're taking zoning to be something like 100% effective all the time when even the best players let other best players in their DANGER zone and pay for it. Smart players predict will get inside and do their damage, zoning is by no means absolute since you are generally going to be outmaneuvering the person you are getting in on, not playing along with "HERE'S MY PRIORITY/RANGE, HERE'S HIS PRIORITY/RANGE, LET'S JAM THEM TOGETHER AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK CLANK GEE HIS CHARACTER HAD MORE SO I LOST
Highlight +quote button, it ain't hard. It's even broken into convenient blocks for that purpose when you press "quote".I ain't breaking up this quote man that'd take forevernot quite
Just quote it again whenever it's useful, that'll ensure that it doesn't get buried.I notice this a lot on this subject, like a few pages ago AA made a post clearly outlining, with evidence, how meta knight doesn't overcentralize the meta game at all. pro ban mostly ignores it until it gets burried a bit, then come back the "meta knight has no bad matchups and overcentralizes the meta game because there is no reason not to use him haoihgoajsgh" posts. It's really annoying. Then there are people like POF and Cr4sh who basically do nothing BUT this in this topic. It's really pretty pointless now...*thinks this topic should be closed*
THANK YOU! At least using a meta-analysis of overall tournament results is defendable (but still weakened by the human factor, in other words, things like concentrations of good players in particular characters) but personal experiences are entirely shaped by your abilities, if you happen to be very good at a particular match-up, it doesn't mean your character is.And people all seem to base this stuff too much on personal experience, there are tons of examples of this and people changing their minds(fiction and ally seem to be the most prominent ones...), and just people in general mostly being shaped by personal experience, like how different regions perceive characters around what top players there use.
Early days of Brawl, people were asking for a Snake ban. Never gained much force because he took a dive relative to MK, but they were definitely there. I don't remember who, but if I look it up, a few of them are probably pro MK ban right now.The fact that anyone wanted snake banned just shows how silly this community is.
Interesting. Not particularly useful, but interesting.I was bored / sleep deprived.
Tournament Organizers: Total 114
For: 53 46.49%
Against: 48 42.10%
Unsure: 13 11.4%
Back Roomers: Total 39
For: 18 46.15%
Against: 16 41.02%
Unsure: 5 12.82%
Notes: BR's were not counted as TO's even if they had the user group. Mods were looked at to see which one they fell to.
Ultimately they always have the choice, this is just the recommended ruleset.What about the idea of actually letting the TO's decide?
rushrushrun-onsrockThe point is priority is one character attribute, and if you're of even skill and your character lacks priority without attributes to make up for it, you're gonna get destroyed, like Falcon does.
This a huuuuuuuuge misunderstanding and I do not know how the hell you managed to make it happen. We are saying the same thing about Falcon, he is is terrible at everything there is to be terrible at, his whole character does not compute with this game. My neon lights point is that Falcon does not have a reliable way to do damage, which is what he needs to be good.Even if he had priority, what would he do with it? Everything outside of uair, nair, bair, loltilts and jab are unreasonably dangerous on block and can't be reasonably autocanceled, and what he has will probably stale very fast, he still lacks a killer with oomph, he wouldn't be in a position to do any more damage if he got a hit in, it's not like grabs become any more useful, and he would still be gimpable. The whole of Falcon's design is made a joke in this game.
Obviously not, you seem to believe priority is meaningless, it's an important character attribute, it's just not the ONLY attribute, others can cover for it. Captain Planet
F'in A dude, you really can't take an implication. OK, spelled out: Hitbox size and speed are not meaningless (which is so obvious I'd never thought I'd have to clarify it) but so long as both characters in a matchup have chances to set up the other character for damage through proper reactions and knowledge of the match's flow, the fight is not dead and done because of priority alone. Wario vs Peach, Melee Falcon vs Marth, et hellacetera, got dam dude.
No, you're the one who's choosing to act like an important character attribute is meaningless because "it's beatable".
Quote me where I implied it's meaningless.
enough DK can beat DDDs in regions other then Atlantic north
FGSFDS don't even start with that. As long as both characters have meaningful ways to damage, hitbox size and speed are not the be-all, and a match that is considered mildly disadvantaged because of it is not a guarantee among level skill ranges.
When we're talking about match-ups, the assumption is equal skill level (among others), and with that assumption, MK is able to significantly advantage himself by playing defense.
Yeah? Are you going to tell me he does it well enough to make ban? Characters that are good generally have some way to force him out of the witness protection program eventually by situational pressure, having an advantage playing defense doesn't make him unreasonable to be offensive on depending on the character.
Again, generalizations in the aether. It can happen, but superior priority and range often result in a character being unable to reach that zone for the vast majority of the match and dying, even if they're about the same skill level.
This is extremely uncomfortably close to semantics, I barely know where we stand. There are also many situational openings that a good player can make by doing something a little bit off, gambling on a specific answer to a specific defense and getting it right, and there are so many approach angles and placements on a given stage possible that even if somebody zones like a machine in a very safe way, the other person may jump in at just the right time and catch them if they're really focused on their options and have the reflexes needed. I have problems with the general way people discuss matchups in this topic, this perfect spacing nonsense and frames+hitboxes machinery, without accounting for the flow of real play.
If he has priority he could, I dunno, actually punch his way through his opponent's defenses and deal some damage, at least on some reasonably fast moves. It's no surprise that Jab is one of his best moves, because it has OMG, priority.This a huuuuuuuuge misunderstanding and I do not know how the hell you managed to make it happen. We are saying the same thing about Falcon, he is is terrible at everything there is to be terrible at, his whole character does not compute with this game. My neon lights point is that Falcon does not have a reliable way to do damage, which is what he needs to be good.Even if he had priority, what would he do with it? Everything outside of uair, nair, bair, loltilts and jab are unreasonably dangerous on block and can't be reasonably autocanceled, and what he has will probably stale very fast, he still lacks a killer with oomph, he wouldn't be in a position to do any more damage if he got a hit in, it's not like grabs become any more useful, and he would still be gimpable. The whole of Falcon's design is made a joke in this game.
Then stop doing such crazy hyperbole, because you seem to be writing it off as useless.F'in A dude, you really can't take an implication. OK, spelled out: Hitbox size and speed are not meaningless (which is so obvious I'd never thought I'd have to clarify it) but so long as both characters in a matchup have chances to set up the other character for damage through proper reactions and knowledge of the match's flow, the fight is not dead and done because of priority alone. Wario vs Peach, Melee Falcon vs Marth, et hellacetera, got dam dude.
Quote me where I implied it's meaningless.
If you shouldn't lose to priority then it's meaningless, right?You are right. And?
If you lose to any character because their moves come out faster and have larger hit boxes when you atack at the same time they do, you are doing it wrong because you are probably attacking at the wrong time. Good players don't lose to priority alone, because they know how to handle it.
Depends entirely on the degree, all else being equal, but one character has a massive priority advantage... the match will become heavily disadvantaged.FGSFDS don't even start with that. As long as both characters have meaningful ways to damage, hitbox size and speed are not the be-all, and a match that is considered mildly disadvantaged because of it is not a guarantee among level skill ranges.
When did I say that it did make him banworthy.Yeah? Are you going to tell me he does it well enough to make ban? Characters that are good generally have some way to force him out of the witness protection program eventually by situational pressure, having an advantage playing defense doesn't make him unreasonable to be offensive on depending on the character.
If it's getting uncomfortably close to semantics, maybe you need to be more careful how you word things so as not to bring this type of debate up in the future.This is extremely uncomfortably close to semantics, I barely know where we stand. There are also many situational openings that a good player can make by doing something a little bit off, gambling on a specific answer to a specific defense and getting it right, and there are so many approach angles and placements on a given stage possible that even if somebody zones like a machine in a very safe way, the other person may jump in at just the right time and catch them. I have problems with the general way people discuss matchups in this topic, this perfect spacing nonsense and frames+hitboxes machinery, without accounting for the flow of real play.
Pro-Ban's To Do List
1. Make a better theoretical model for match-ups. The current one really doesn't suffice because it neglects to take into account human error as far as I've observed, possibly a great deal more. I've attempted to help with my thread on "Mindgames Potential", though we still need a concrete understanding of how often a player should fall victim to mindgames, and to what degree before it can be finished.
2. Using the new theoretical model, make accurate match-ups.
3. Illustrate based on the match-ups, that MK makes 50% of the cast +1 nonviable, independent of any other characters.
4. Figure out a reasonable margin of error for tournament results to vary from the theoretical match-ups.
5. Illustrate that empirical results are the same as your match-ups would suggest or within the pre-determined margin of error.
If you can do this (not necessarily explicitly, since a lot of this is data-based, a lot of other people are capable of doing this, so you'll merely need to present the data) I will happily join pro-ban and argue your case. I'm sure a lot of other people will agree at that point and become pro-ban as well, because that would undercut the core of anti-ban.
However, until that's satisfied, I will not join you and you'll notice that the most vocal anti-ban crowd references to these same standards as well, so they will not join you either, so with that you could probably win the debate on this.
Until you do, pro-ban's got nothing.
No, YOU listen since apparently, you are suffering from such an incredible case of dyslexia that you STILL aremkaing assumptions of my statement.Listen.
First the problem is "Meta Knight wins too many tourneys."
Correct Martrh did win more.Too bad, Marth won more.
Really? Do explain as to how I started talking about diversity in the top 8?Then the problem changes to "Well, Marth didn't place as much in lower placings, so there's more diversity!"
OH look, it is something I addressed in my very FIRST post that YOU replied to.Too bad again, there were just as many Foxes placing high as Meta Knights, and the other top characters all placed more often than all the top characters in Brawl hands down.
While Marth did indeed win more consistantly thne very other character, we also realize that the top 8 was filled with many other charatcers, most notably spacies.
am sorry, how stupid must you be?So which is the problem? Is it that MK is winning too much, or that he is "overcentralized" and placing too often? You can't have your cake and eat it too.
No problem, I think that the entire thing had been going on for long enough, and that priority, while not the only measure of a character's ability definitely is useful and should not be ignored.thank you Adambrodeus you basically said what ive been trying to tell rehab this entire time.
Thanks.There you go.
It seems so far everyone who agrees with overcentralization as the ban criteria has spoken highly of it and I'd just like to know if everyone basically agree on it's use as the standard.Pro-Ban's To Do List
1. Make a better theoretical model for match-ups. The current one really doesn't suffice because it neglects to take into account human error as far as I've observed, possibly a great deal more. I've attempted to help with my thread on "Mindgames Potential", though we still need a concrete understanding of how often a player should fall victim to mindgames, and to what degree before it can be finished.
2. Using the new theoretical model, make accurate match-ups.
3. Illustrate based on the match-ups, that MK makes 50% of the cast +1 nonviable, independent of any other characters.
4. Figure out a reasonable margin of error for tournament results to vary from the theoretical match-ups.
5. Illustrate that empirical results are the same as your match-ups would suggest or within the pre-determined margin of error.
If you can do this (not necessarily explicitly, since a lot of this is data-based, a lot of other people are capable of doing this, so you'll merely need to present the data) I will happily join pro-ban and argue your case. I'm sure a lot of other people will agree at that point and become pro-ban as well, because that would undercut the core of anti-ban.
However, until that's satisfied, I will not join you and you'll notice that the most vocal anti-ban crowd references to these same standards as well, so they will not join you either, so with that you could probably win the debate on this.
Until you do, pro-ban's got nothing.
I don't agree with the overcentralization as a criteria to ban. It's a stupid idea to ban a character. Just because people play the character because they're the best doesn't mean that said character is good enough to be banned. See Kirby and Pikachu in smash 64.It seems so far everyone who agrees with overcentralization as the ban criteria has spoken highly of it and I'd just like to know if everyone basically agree on it's use as the standard.
then don't plague us with your petty attempts of getting your post count +1Adumbrodeus, I'm typing up a long explanation of why I don't agree with your list as the standard. It's taking longer than I thought.
...I don't agree with the overcentralization as a criteria to ban. It's a stupid idea to ban a character. Just because people play the character because they're the best doesn't mean that said character is good enough to be banned. See Kirby and Pikachu in smash 64.
Ok, take your time? But do you agree with the standard of overcentralization in the "sirlin-centric" sense? Because if not, it'd probably be easier to discuss "why Sirlin's ban criteria?" rather then "why not my to-do list?".Adumbrodeus, I'm typing up a long explanation of why I don't agree with your list as the standard. It's taking longer than I thought.
You think I care about post count? What is post count going to do for me??? My tag thing under my name is already at smash master or whatever. It's not going to go to another level. You can even check my post history and see that most of my posts are very, very long.then don't plague us with your petty attempts of getting your post count +1
You're completely missing the point.Except that MK does not place as high or as often as everyone says he does. Does anyone care to debate this point? We have no shortage of data available, it's quite easy to prove, and has been done many times.
First, before you make this into a pissing match, note that I'm anti-ban, and not once did I ever say MK was overcentralizing the metagame.Nice try, but this has nothing to do with anything.
The argument is that MK is "overcentralizing the metagame", when in fact he only has 25% of national tourney top 8 placings.
I don't care if the roster has 25 character, 39 characters, 2 characters, or infinity character.
Meta Knight is still placing the exact same amount. In no way is anything being discussed remotely relative to total cast size.
You completely neglected the roster size when comparing something that obviously has to do with roster size.Please, enlighten us all to my mathematical errors.
Once again, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Have you even glanced at the Brawl matchup chart? Probably not, judging from the vacuity of your arguments.Yes, because counters are a unique concept to Brawl, and no fighting game has ever had strong counters in its cast before, especially Melee.
"Strange counterpicking mechanic", gimme a break, this isn't even worth my time.
Wow you're dense. Let's quote d4ba's original post, shall we?Which has to do with Meta Knight........ how?
To add further emphasis to this, consider double blinds. Neither you nor your opponent know who the other is picking. You lose the first match, so you get the counterpick. Your opponent loses the second match, so he get's the choice of counterpick for the third match. Which character will be effected the least by an attempted counterpick in this situation? Who's the safest choice?brawl has 35 characters.
melee has 25 characters.
Chances that certain characters are going to be better than others in most fighters?
I'll list you some examples. 56 characters in marvel vs capcom 2, 4 make up most team combinations. 19 tournament played characters in 3rd strike. 3 make up most tournament top 3 placings. Street fighter 2 turbo, 12 characters (not champion edition) and only a couple were placing high (until sagat got banned/depends where u played the game).
Do some rough math and you'll see that 10ish% of character viability is good. The unique method of how brawl matches work out allow many characters to be useful in tournament. However, since MK works so well all around and everywhere. Players would rather not be counterpicked at all and simply choose MK.
I believe this game has some the largest character playability than any other fighter; without Mk involved. How many times have you played a tournament match whenever someone loses the first round with their favorite character and plays MK throughout the rest of the set? It gets old.