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

[|RK|]

What flow of thought? More like a stream of crap.

Please, pay attention to my earlier post, and Inui's people.

I'm tired of doing this over and over again.

 

[GodAtHand]

@RK, you didn't have to get touchy. I'm not even pro-ban, I didn't and still don't feel like reading through 100+ pages of posts so I brought up the points I wanted to see counters to. Why is Akuma a bad example anyways?

On a side note, What is the absolute worst that can happen IF metaknight is banned?

 

[Darxmarth23]

This debate has gotten a bit out of hand, and I can't debate anymore with others considering every few seconds a new page comes up.

I am Pro Ban and I voted yes.

I doubt that Mk will get banned.

Thank you all for arguing and contributing. Good bye.

 

[Falconv1.0]

@RK, you didn't have to get touchy. I'm not even pro-ban, I didn't and still don't feel like reading through 100+ pages of posts so I brought up the points I wanted to see counters to. Why is Akuma a bad example anyways?

On a side note, What is the absolute worst that can happen IF metaknight is banned?

Because MK is the best in the game, Akuma is the God and all powerful deity of SF2. The fact that you bring him up shows you dont even know **** about him, at all.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Because MK is the best in the game, Akuma is the God and all powerful deity of SF2. The fact that you bring him up shows you dont even know **** about him, at all.

You are a complete and total moron. And it has nothing to do with your views on MK.

 

[Falconv1.0]

You are a complete and total moron. And it has nothing to do with your views on MK.

Oh please do explain.

 

[yummynbeefy]

im going to give my honest opinion

he should be banned but because of the no excuses attitude of the smash community id say he will never be banned fox, marth and early sheik were no where near as broken as mk

 

[BOB SAGET]

@RK, you didn't have to get touchy. I'm not even pro-ban, I didn't and still don't feel like reading through 100+ pages of posts so I brought up the points I wanted to see counters to. Why is Akuma a bad example anyways?

On a side note, What is the absolute worst that can happen IF metaknight is banned?

then im gonna have to start all over and get a new main.

 

[kirbywizard]

then im gonna have to start all over and get a new main.

Or they could make a rule were you can use meteknight only once per match, then you could use two people and not have to rely on meteknight for all your wins.

 

[|RK|]

You are a complete and total moron. And it has nothing to do with your views on MK.

*throws brick*

Nah, but let me approach this in a calmer matter. Please state why you believe that Falcon is a moron? If there's nothing about MK, what could there be?

 

[|RK|]

Or they could make a rule were you can use meteknight only once per match, then you could use two people and not have to rely on meteknight for all your wins.

Or they could, y'know, not ban MK? Whobo's results mean nothing.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Or they could make a rule were you can use meteknight only once per match, then you could use two people and not have to rely on meteknight for all your wins.

Never going to happen ever.

Ban/no ban or gtfo.

 

[kirbywizard]

Never going to happen ever.

Ban/no ban or gtfo.

I rather stay and see what fate is handed to meteknight. I would use the match ups as some type of support but a lot of match ups are out dated. This will take around an hour or so just to read all these post.

 

[BOB SAGET]

Or they could, y'know, not ban MK? Whobo's results mean nothing.

get that sig off!

 

[|RK|]

I'll be nice.

 

[PK-ow!]

Him being permanently banned, in the instance that a character suddenly finds a great trait, or an advanced technique that reshuffles the meta game completely, meta knight would have reason to be unbanned.

But saying that meta knight temporarily banned will completely ruin everything is silly. There is DOUBLES still. And I don't think many people believe Meta Knight (or even double meta) is unbeatable in teams.

Since no one has said this yet (hooray search function):

There is no Meta Knight in Doubles that exists in Singles.

In Singles, your matchup is a selection from a 39 x 39 matrix of characters.
In Doubles, the matchup is a selection from a 1521 x 1521 matrix of binary tuples of characters.
(The mindboggling size of this matrix probably being the reason Doubles is so interesting.)

It's a different game. You don't have a Meta Knight. You have (Meta Knight, Lucario). Or (Donkey Kong, Meta Knight). Or (Meta Knight, Donkey Kong}. The terms that feature in a description of a matchup of Doubles just aren't the same type as those for Singles.

In Doubles, the correlate of banning a character in Singles would be banning a team's pair. It's possible that "Game and Watch + Zamus" is broken in Doubles while no other combination including Game and Watch or Zamus is.


So I'm not sure what point you were raising.


@Da-D-Mon: I don't think that's a solution. Spammy people will want to spam this thread, no matter what. The intellectually decent people can't recoil from trying to argue this out just because of that.
The spam will only stop if the spam is punished. That's the truth.

@RK Joker: I believe that post by Inui had a few responses. I could find them, or I could just sum it up by saying the inference

These are all situations where Meta Knight is not the best option, so he’s clearly not breaking the counterpicking system.

is deductively invalid.

As for your own post which you quote along with Inui's. . . umm. . . I'm confused about two things:

Did you all read M2K's Myspace blog? The best (known) player in the world calls you crybabies. He notes that you want to ban a character that he (and others) have put HOURS of practice into. HOURS. MK mains practice too, you know.

For hours? I have practiced for days. Seems odd for M2K to describe his practice with the term 'hours'. But I'm sure that's just nothing and he really meant something of the scale that makes sense for what he said. I mean, it's M2K. The guy plays smash in his sleep (there's video proof).

Meta-Knight simply embodies the abilities of most of the game's characters. The fact that someone does better with Meta-Knight is no surprise. MK has their character's tools, and the ability to use them better. The phras Xien used yesterday to describe Arceus is the same for MK "Jack of all Trades, Master of None." As he is the Jack of all trades, the masters of these tools obviously have things better than him. MK just has more tools, and the player can not only keep their fighting style, but adopt new tactics. That's it. Every character has something better than MK. Expand on his fighting style, and winning isn't that far of a goal. Expand on your character's fighting style, and have the glory of mastery.

The part in blue seems to contradict the part in yellow.

 

[Kain6th]

Or they could make a rule were you can use meteknight only once per match, then you could use two people and not have to rely on meteknight for all your wins.

Even though I disagree with this, I still think this is the kind of thinking we should be doing. A large portion of the community wants MK banned. However, another portion of the community does not. So maybe if we found a way to compromise like he can only be used a few times, or ban him for winners, but not for losers brackets, i dunno. I'm not a pro at any of this, but seriously guys why not try to come up with something that can satisfy both positions.

Compromise is the key word here.

 

[|RK|]

Hmmm... I should edit that. Let me clarify. He has all of their tools and the ability to use them better. How? Because he has other character's tools as well. Thus, the original holders have the better version of the move, as they have mastery. MK's version is only better because he has more. Those with less have better because that is their original trait. Lucario has transcendant priority as well. It slightly different from MK's, though. And Lucario's priority is with all Aura based moves. That's over 90% of his moveset.

 

[Greenpoe]

Even though I disagree with this, I still think this is the kind of thinking we should be doing. A large portion of the community wants MK banned. However, another portion of the community does not. So maybe if we found a way to compromise like he can only be used a few times, or ban him for winners, but not for losers brackets, i dunno. I'm not a pro at any of this, but seriously guys why not try to come up with something that can satisfy both positions.

Compromise is the key word here.

The game has had MK for a year. Now let's play WITHOUT MK for a year.

 

[Palpi]

Lol. no.

Compromising is losing in this case.

 

[AvaricePanda]

@anyone, Why compromise what doesn't need to be compromised?

MK isn't broken. Nobody has provided me substantial evidence to say otherwise. The most I've recieved were often skewed tournament results and vague statements such as, "He's ruining other character's metagames!" MK is certainly not banworthy, and I'd honestly like someone to tell me how he is. I've refuted other points and haven't gotten responses from them, so eh...

 

[Gnes]

PK-OW...your post was win.

 

[Twin_Scimitar]

AvaricePanda, this is one of the best proish-ban arguments I've seen from my scanning of this thread. Enjoy.

I had an intelligent post ready, but in the end, it doesn't really matter.

I will admit to being sick of being significantly better than the vast majority of my opponents who pick MK, and still have to struggle and worry about securing the win.

I'm tired of losing only to one character (Snakeee's ZSS not included). THAT means something to me.

Saturday night, I spent the entire night training with M2k, and realized just how badly MK ***** Marth, and essentially the rest of the cast (I used my relatively good Falco, Mario, G&W, and Link in addition to Marth.) For MK's that are not winning YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG.

The problem with me doesn't lie in the fact that MK has lightning fast moves on all of his attacks. The problem is that MK's special moveset (primarily Tornado and Shuttle Loop) SHUT DOWN the majority of the game.

Shuttle Loop: This move has invincibility when used on the ground, and hits with kill power. It is virtually impossible to approach grounded MK from the air (which is the most common form of approach in this game) because he will almost always be able to win with grounded Shuttle Loop, even if you have an aerial which would be able to challenge his (which most characters really don't . . . but Marth does.)

Mach Tornado:I know a million and one ways to deal with Tornado with Marth: Counter, Shield Breaker, Tipper Fsmash, Nair the top, Shield and punish, Dolphin Slash, run away. However, that STILL doesn't account for the game breaking properties of Tornado. If it wasn't for this move, I would be content with MK (M2k agrees with me here). Having STUPIDLY high priority, MK's Tornado goes through nearly every aerial, and you generally won't be able to hit the top of it if the MK SHTornadoes. This is game breaking, because it means that regular spacing and zoning is completely destroyed. It's extremely easy for the MK to assume that you are going to use your regular spacing and zoning tools that you've been using, because your mix-ups are extremely risky. Marth and MK without Tornado are virtually EVEN when zoning each other from a neutral position. Marth has Dancing Blade for a fast ground approach, MK has Dash attack (and his dash grab is really stupid, but that's another issue.) Both character's Fair at each other, and approaching is equally unsafe. Actually, since MK's Fair is three hits but only the first one is involved in a trade, Marth is close to advantage when zoning. Then, MK reads the extremely predictable SHaerial, and Tornadoes through it, potentially dealing 16 damage.

This is what makes MK broken. This tactic is employable vs nearly every character in the cast. Diddy doesn't beat MK, even on FD. MK's simply don't know how to catch banana's and how to edgeguard Diddy properly. Once MK has Diddy offstage, simply fly high enough so that if Diddy uses SideB, you can safely Dair him without risk of getting gimped. Or, simply grab the edge so Diddy is forced to UpB after he SideB's. Once Diddy is directly below the ledge, FFNair from the ledge gimps very reliably. MK's simply haven't learned to catch bananas yet. Though his lower aerial mobility makes it slower to approach Diddy, a MK who has mastered catching bananas will not lose to a Diddy.

Mr. Game and Watch cannot approach from the air. Shuttle Loop shuts him down hard. When fighting, Game and Watch has good tools, and similar stats to MK, but a fast MK will be hard to land a kill on, and simply outspeed GnW on average. MK is simply too fast for most of the cast to handle. At first, I thought I was just slow, but then remembered that I'm actually extremely fast, and I saw myself getting hit before it happened but I didn't have any options and MK was going to hit me no matter what.

Wario might be the best option. I hate that character, but if there really are Wario mains somewhere out there that can beat m2k, please, for the love of god, teach the rest of them. Wario is able to airdodge safely, due to high aerial mobility. Plus, fart is amazing (if not somewhat gross.)

Snake does NOT win. I thought he did, but he really doesn't. First off, Snake pulling out a grenade is punishable by Dash Grab if anticipated. Dash Grab leaves enough time for any throw to activate, without MK getting blown up. Snake offstage gets gimped, and should be gimped fairly consistently. Mk's options are TOO good. MK also camps against Snake well, as grenades don't force an apporach against MK.

When all players are playing at the highest possible level, almost all match-ups are +5 more points than commonly listed vs. MK. It's not that a collaberation of MKs have gotten together and advanced his metagame quickly. I talk with other top level Marth's, and other top players, and it's more often that I share MORE broken stuff that MK can do that they haven't figured out yet. Finally, two nights ago, M2k realized an easier way to gimp Marth that no MK knew before, but Neo and I discovered months ago. His metagame is still growing, even for M2k! He's still getting more broken.

Oh, and before I forget, Inui, you do not have 18 frames to punish MK's Dsmash LOL! I would never use it! You forgot to calculate the Shield Hitstun dsmash gives, which probably gives about 8-12 frames. If it's well spaced, many characters will have a hard time punishing this with a kill move. <3 I'm going to try tipper dsmash more.

The last time I talked about this topic, I was still learning, and wanted to learn how to beat MK before he got banned. Now, I know how to beat him, and I also know just how much of an epic fail Marth loses that match-up in, and other characters all around. When more MK's start to use Shuttle Loop as the broken tool it is, and use Tornado properly, it's OVER.

So far, most MK's don't do this, or other good tactics, because they don't know them, but when they find out, it's going to be extremely bad for the rest of us.

Still on the fence, but leaning more toward ban this time.

 

[East]

I finally understand the reason for the smash back room. It only took 43 pages and an amassing of most [the good and the other 90%] of the smash community. Whoever thought of the BR, thank you. I'm still not totally swayed by either side yet so I'm adamantly not sure.

P.S. I've learned that members who joined after Dec 2007 are like cans. Some are ok, but others are dented or puffy.

 

[1048576]

Just to say for the Akuma thing:

most pro-bies don't think MK is as broken as Akuma (not by a long shot) When we use Akuma in an argument, it's usually to say 'Well your ban criteria is so difficult to meet that Akuma wouldn't even be banned under it, and that's absurd, so your ban criteria is flawed' not 'OMG MK's the best character just like Akuma ban plz'

 

[Kain6th]

The game has had MK for a year. Now let's play WITHOUT MK for a year.

Ok sure why not?

 

[JMan8891]

Purely speculative, but if for the third time, the general concenus (majority) is pro-ban, will it finally be enforced?

Or would something miraculous happen and Mk stays yet again?

 

[Shaya]

1) I don't see why when people go "temp ban is stupid", they think the only reason you'd temporarily ban him would be to let other metagames catch up.

2) I'm advocating a temporary ban (for people who can't get past point 1; just think of it as a perma ban with point 3 running around) just to allow the community to see whether a competitive metagame would be better with him or without him. Would the game be more shallow? Would the game be more diverse? etcetcetc. If he's permanently banned and this doesn't happen, people will start advocating for him to be unbanned. Slapping the idea of it being "experimental" or "temporary" FOR IT TO NOT BE RELATED TO POINT 1 could work.

Because chances are, no metagame is going to catch up.
3) And if they do, in the long run of whilst MK is "perma banned", there would be a reason to advocate unbanning him.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

Yes, I believe he should be banned. My reasons have not changed from the last threads. It basically boils down to this summary:

I believe it will be better for the metagame and Brawl as a whole with him banned.

Why is this grounds for banning something? Well, it was grounds for banning items - items are not broken, but they reduce the metagame to something silly - for example, food. If we can ban food because its not the type of game we want to play, I believe we can ban Metaknight for hampering the growth and competive aspects of the game.

Why is this not true of any other character? Because banning another character won't have only positive effects - if you banned snake, for example, it would hurt DDD because people use him to beat Snake. Metaknight has no bad matchups so banning him hurts no one besides metaknight, everything else can grow.

That's it in a jiff.

Basically, we cam ban him just because its much, much, much better for the game because we ban the food item because its much, much much better for the game

Food is less broken than metaknighit. IMO this can be NEARLY universally agreed upon. So if we can ban food, then we can ban Metaknight. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing of debate is whether banning MK is good or bad for the competitive game. To me all the evidence of his lack of bad matchups suggests it is indeed good for the game in a a spectrum of ways.

 

[Brinzy]

Edresses, while I can see where you're coming from, I must repeat my rhetoric again and say that just because MK has no bad match-ups doesn't mean that characters with a 4/6 on him won't be better off when they're getting 3/7s from threats that MK can get rid of. I obviously haven't blossomed this into a very strong argument for things such as, "What about counterpicking" and whatnot, but personally that's why I'm not too keen on banning him.

 

[XienZo]

Edresses, while I can see where you're coming from, I must repeat my rhetoric again and say that just because MK has no bad match-ups doesn't mean that characters with a 4/6 on him won't be better off when they're getting 3/7s from threats that MK can get rid of. I obviously haven't blossomed this into a very strong argument for things such as, "What about counterpicking" and whatnot, but personally that's why I'm not too keen on banning him.

What threats does MK actually keep under control?

 

[AvaricePanda]

And yet if you temp ban it, there's that much higher chances of people switching to perma ban because they think, "Oh, it's easier now. I don't have to worry about MK." If someone suggests to bring MK back, most wouldn't want it because most would prefer an MKless community where they don't have to worry about him to a MK community.

Plus, because the character's banned, guess which match-up people aren't learning? Unbanning MK after no one's played him for a while (and no one's played MK for a while) would just bring us back to square one, except people will know what it's like to play without him, so there's a MUCH higher chance of him being banned.

Everyone's pretty much certain what will happen if you temp ban MK; the top 10 spots will be more diverse around the top tiers. Sure, most people, including me, do want to see more tournament diversity. However, that's just a want. Tournament diversity isn't necessary at all, and you shouldn't ban a character for being overplayed.

Plus, there's no reason to temp ban something that isn't banworthy (although this is difficult to determine, because the definition of banworthy varies from person to person). Pierce's description of why MKs shuttle loop (which I honestly don't think is that bad) and his Tornado (which yes, I think this is too powerful) are broken can persuade some to go on the fence for pro-ban. But a lot of what he said with utilizing the two attacks correctly are just potential stuff. A gaming community shouldn't ban someone if he has potential to be broken; ban someone for what they currently are.

As of now, I'm anti-ban. By the end of Genesis, who knows, I could be persuaded. Hopefully after Genesis the community will have a general conclusion as to whether or not MK is banworthy or not. But as of now, no, he isn't.

 

[rathy Aro]

I'm not sure which way I should vote so let me try to break it down and I'll do so out loud (btw I picked no ban last time, reason being there was no good reason).

Advantages of banning MK:
There would be more diversity at tourneys especially in the top five. (probably true)
There will be no character in the game that can't be counter picked thus preserving the counterpick system (true)
No one would leave the community because he was not banned (definitely true)
Other character's metagames will develop faster along with the game as a whole (maybe true)
There will be less, effective stalling in tourneys (true, I think)
--
His ease of use, his supposed inability to be counter picked, and his dominance over the tier list and major tourneys make him a "cheap" character. (subjective)

Disadvantages:
Many MK mains (and others) will quit brawl (probably true)
Other characters will be banned as they rise to MK's current position of best (probably not true, but techs, etc. are probably more likely to be banned)
--
It's unfair to those who have put a lot of time into developing him. (subjective)
The smash community will loose respect for banning a character, because its "immature". (subjective)

I quickly skimmed over the thread to see if I missed anything. Don't think I did.

Conclusion: Anti-ban.
Reason: it hurts the community.
Explanation: Note that in my advantages versus disadvantages there's a lot more reasons to ban mk, which is why all the anti-ban arguements are only trying to refute the pro-ban's side. This is pretty pointless if there's no good reason to not ban mk, unless you assume banning a character is inherently bad and it isn't, because nothing is inherently bad (unless God says so and I doubt he or any similar deity is weighing in. >.>) That all means that we should ban mk, because there's a lack of a reason to ban him and there's a few reasons to ban him, BUT that's not true. There ARE reasons to keep him that are actually very serious. On the objective, reasonable side MK mains WILL leave and others will as well severly hurting our community for no serious reason (this is nothing compared to those who are slowly leaving brawl because they can't deal with MK especially when those who can't deal with him switch to him). Also, though subjective, forcing that the many who did put time into mk to have wasted their time is more "morally wrong" than having a broken character in the metagame.


btw: I would also support having a few no MK tourneys or brackets at major tourneys (we can call them S tier and below tournaments. lol), because diversity in tournaments is a legit point and doing this would avoid the potential exodus of MK mains among other things.


tl:dr Don't ban him because the cons of doing so outweigh the pros.

Now for the important part of my post that is off-topic and therefore can be ignored if you simply want to continue arguing for arguement's sake. The reason I replied as I did was to give a glimpse of what I consider "effective" arguing. My style of arguing is only effective if the goal of an argument is to find the right solution. Tbh, I didn't take all of the suggestion I gave myself, but that's because I'm lazy.

First note that I didn't say "we should ban mk because...." That already leads you down a path where you are going to lean towards subjective reasoning. Rather I looked at the results of banning MK. Look at how I first jotted down all the facts or rather points that I would draw my conclusion for to make it easier to see where I am coming from. Also note how I put probably true, maybe true, etc. next to each of my facts so that it takes statements that cannot be factual (as that would mean I could predict the future) and gives them a certain amount of weight depending on how reasonable they are. Most importantly I was neutral to begin and then convinced myself of one side over the other making sure to make several concessions before asserting my point.

In terms of how I suggest people should respond, attack the basis of my argument while keeping in mind the probably, definitely, etc next to each. Focus on my conclusion, because its more likely that I mess up in my thought path and not in my copying down things that are pretty much fact. Don't critique my grammer, spelling, or the quality of my personality. >.>

Not saying that everyone should post like I did (my post didn't even completely meet my criteria), but that everyone should consider things I mentioned when posting especially the arguing to reach a solution rather than arguing to prove I'm right point, because that leads to the hundreds of posts already made simply going back and forth endlessly.

Spoiler

Sorry if this post makes me come off like a elitist *** whole..... I just am and I can't help that. =P

 

[Brinzy]

What threats does MK actually keep under control?

Marth, who has a good number of 60/40s and some 65/35s and even 70/30s. Kirby, unless they've changed it, is one of those 65/35s, so they're not all poor characters.

G&W, who hard counters a myriad of characters.

DDD/Snake are debatable for some people apparently, but DDD breaks many characters as well, and Snake is... well, Snake.

Falco, who is a pain for many characters in the first place.


Yes, each of these characters have good answers or even counters that are not MK, but without MK, that's one less option of the few for people to use to CP against the rest of them. Also, without MK, you're likely to see even more of these, which will mean about the same or even less of many other characters.

 

[Bonehimer]

Yes, I believe he should be banned. My reasons have not changed from the last threads. It basically boils down to this summary:

I believe it will be better for the metagame and Brawl as a whole with him banned.

Why is this grounds for banning something? Well, it was grounds for banning items - items are not broken, but they reduce the metagame to something silly - for example, food. If we can ban food because its not the type of game we want to play, I believe we can ban Metaknight for hampering the growth and competive aspects of the game.

Why is this not true of any other character? Because banning another character won't have only positive effects - if you banned snake, for example, it would hurt DDD because people use him to beat Snake. Metaknight has no bad matchups so banning him hurts no one besides metaknight, everything else can grow.

That's it in a jiff.

Basically, we cam ban him just because its much, much, much better for the game because we ban the food item because its much, much much better for the game

Food is less broken than metaknighit. IMO this can be NEARLY universally agreed upon. So if we can ban food, then we can ban Metaknight. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing of debate is whether banning MK is good or bad for the competitive game. To me all the evidence of his lack of bad matchups suggests it is indeed good for the game in a a spectrum of ways.

If MK isn't ban I move we allow food back on.

 

[DKKountry]

It seems to me that the MK problem is bigger on the west coast than on the east coast. I could be wrong, it just seems that way to me.

 

[Praxis]

I'm not sure which way I should vote so let me try to break it down and I'll do so out loud (btw I picked no ban last time, reason being there was no good reason).

Advantages of banning MK:
There would be more diversity at tourneys especially in the top five. (probably true)
There will be no character in the game that can't be counter picked thus preserving the counterpick system (true)
No one would leave the community because he was not banned (definitely true)
Other character's metagames will develop faster along with the game as a whole (maybe true)
There will be less, effective stalling in tourneys (true, I think)
--
His ease of use, his supposed inability to be counter picked, and his dominance over the tier list and major tourneys make him a "cheap" character. (subjective)

Ok.

Disadvantages:
Many MK mains (and others) will quit brawl (probably true)

Compared to how many might leave in frustration if he's not?

Other characters will be banned as they rise to MK's current position of best (probably not true, but techs, etc. are probably more likely to be banned)

Absurd. No other character has no bad matchups. The SBR will be careful not to let this happen.

--
It's unfair to those who have put a lot of time into developing him. (subjective)
The smash community will loose respect for banning a character, because its "immature". (subjective)

Both subjective.


Your anti-ban reasons fall apart under scrutiny.

 

[Cease Tick]

Marth, who has a good number of 60/40s and some 65/35s and even 70/30s. Kirby, unless they've changed it, is one of those 65/35s, so they're not all poor characters.

G&W, who hard counters a myriad of characters.

DDD/Snake are debatable for some people apparently, but DDD breaks many characters as well, and Snake is... well, Snake.

Falco, who is a pain for many characters in the first place.


Yes, each of these characters have good answers or even counters that are not MK, but without MK, that's one less option of the few for people to use to CP against the rest of them. Also, without MK, you're likely to see even more of these, which will mean about the same or even less of many other characters.

Kirby is 55/45 now I believe.

 

[complexity1234]

Marth, who has a good number of 60/40s and some 65/35s and even 70/30s. Kirby, unless they've changed it, is one of those 65/35s, so they're not all poor characters.

G&W, who hard counters a myriad of characters.

DDD/Snake are debatable for some people apparently, but DDD breaks many characters as well, and Snake is... well, Snake.

Falco, who is a pain for many characters in the first place.


Yes, each of these characters have good answers or even counters that are not MK, but without MK, that's one less option of the few for people to use to CP against the rest of them. Also, without MK, you're likely to see even more of these, which will mean about the same or even less of many other characters.

i know right.
The metaknights are just gona switch to Snake/Dedede/falco so your characters (some mid to low tier) are gonna get **** on either way lol

 

[da K.I.D.]

And yet if you temp ban it, there's that much higher chances of people switching to perma ban because they think, "Oh, it's easier now. I don't have to worry about MK." If someone suggests to bring MK back, most wouldn't want it because most would prefer an MKless community where they don't have to worry about him to a MK community.

If that happens, than that says to me that it was a good idea...

Plus, because the character's banned, guess which match-up people aren't learning? Unbanning MK after no one's played him for a while (and no one's played MK for a while) would just bring us back to square one, except people will know what it's like to play without him, so there's a MUCH higher chance of him being banned.

Saying that nobody is going to play metaknight just cause they cant play him in tournament, is as assuming that nobody is going to play captain falcon, just because they cant play him in tournament. which we all know is false. cause tons of people play CF

As of now, I'm anti-ban. By the end of Genesis, who knows, I could be persuaded. Hopefully after Genesis the community will have a general conclusion as to whether or not MK is banworthy or not. But as of now, no, he isn't.

If you could, please give me a detailed reasoning on why we cant ban MK after seeing the WHOBO results.

Than, once you do that, go through all teh writing, and whenever you see the word WHOBO, take it out and put APEX in its place. And after that, do it again, and everytime you see APEX, take it out and put Genesis in its place.

now do you see how the "lets wait for this tourney to make a decision" idea doesnt work?