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

[Supermodel From Paris]

Sigh. Man, that's funny.

So what you're saying is that MK mains should come out in favor of banning MK for there to be any validity to our argument? Yeah, that's going to happen.

This is why it's so easy to defend the status quo. When something is really, really unfair it becomes very easy to defend it with logical fallacies and most people don't even know what they are.

 

[TLMSheikant]

To counterpick MK Praxis, you have to pick a different color Metaknight.

I couldnt have said it better myself. U sir win the thread.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

So what you're saying is that MK mains should come out in favor of banning MK for there to be any validity to our argument? Yeah, that's going to happen.

This is why it's so easy to defend the status quo. When something is really, really unfair it becomes very easy to defend it with logical fallacies and most people don't even know what they are.

No, I'm saying it's funny that you think that having someone who has a 60/40 matchup on Metaknight come out in support of a ban of MK would be some sort of "ultimate argument of the gods!"

lol

And then you somehow infer that "since this amazing 60/40 matchup against Metaknight doesn't exist, then no one with that matchup can say he shouldn't be banned, so he should be banned!"

Your logic, or lack thereof, is astounding.

This is why it's so easy to defend the status quo. When something is really, really unfair it becomes very easy to defend it with logical fallacies and most people don't even know what they are.

I totally agree with this statement.

As is obviously signified by this poll, the act of defending the banning of Metaknight is the status quo. You are defending that status quo. Congratulations, you just proved by your own words that you are defending a logical fallacy that you don't even understand.

Again, I couldn't agree more. I'd say that's an accurate description of the pro-ban philosophy.


Man you're funny.

 

[Ravin]

Same color Meta Knight is even better, maybe a hard counter!?

I donno. Is the Same color glitch in melee still in brawl?

That would be epic.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

No, I'm saying it's funny that you think that having someone who has a 60/40 matchup on Metaknight come out in support of a ban of MK would be some sort of "ultimate argument of the gods!"

lol

And then you somehow infer that "since this amazing 60/40 matchup against Metaknight doesn't exist, then no one with that matchup can say he shouldn't be banned, so he should be banned!"

Your logic, or lack thereof, is astounding.

Uh, no, I actually agree with you. Did you even read the quote I was responding to, or are you just being a ***** for the sake of it? I think we both know the answer to that.

I totally agree with this statement.

As is obviously signified by this poll, the act of defending Metaknight is the status quo. Congratulations, you just proved by your own words that you are defending a logical fallacy that you don't even understand.

Again, I couldn't agree more.

Man you're funny.

Do you even know what "status quo" means? Seriously?

I don't even care about your position on MK; you are completely braindead.

 

[Nic64]

I donno. Is the Same color glitch in melee still in brawl?

That would be epic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL8xHanN3Nk

did you see that meta knight kick that meta knight's ***, clearly 6:4 or worse IMO

 

[Tarmogoyf]

I donno. Is the Same color glitch in melee still in brawl?

That would be epic.

It's easier now. Pick your color, log your character out, have the other player pick the same color character, then go into team battle, bring the other player back in, anad go out of team battle. You are both the same color character.

 

[Delvro]

When something is really, really unfair it becomes very easy to defend it with logical fallacies and most people don't even know what they are.

You can say that again. I've lost count of the slippery-slopes and straw man arguments... "Oh, if we ban MK, then next comes planking, then Dedede's infinites, then snake, then Falco blah blah blah..."

Anybody that tries to argue on here should read Carl Sagan's argument baloney detection kit:
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/baloney.html

 

[deepseadiva]

Repeating yourself does not good because as we saw, he MUST have a secondary otherwise, he would not win a tournament in which a marth of equal or even slightly lesser skill appeared.

God forbid he ran into a great Marth early in the tournment, he wouldn't get a **** thing.
So he MUST use a secondary if he plans to use mewtwo, because its just THAT bad.

God, this thread is going stupidly fast.

I'm repeating myself since you're missing the point. Let me lay down the two options:

1) A Ganondorf can, but shouldn't face a Sheik.

2) A banned MK just can't.

There's a key diffrence there.

 

[Ravin]

It's easier now. Pick your color, log your character out, have the other player pick the same color character, then go into team battle, bring the other player back in, anad go out of team battle. You are both the same color character.

I wanna see some DSF and M2K Metaknight dittos with the same color.

NOW

 

[gm jack]

This feels very appropriate, if you miss out the first word.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

1) A Ganondorf can, but shouldn't face a Sheik.

2) A banned MK just can't.

Yeah, pretty sure that is the point of banning him.

 

[MetalMusicMan]

I know exactly what status quo means and currently the status quo is cheering for a Metaknight ban. That position has been unchanged pretty much since before the game came out. Very simple to see... but hey, I'm braindead, what do I know? lol

 

[gm jack]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn9_pBEigGU&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VROmDsbN6mQ&feature=channel_page

That is a character that is supposedly at a 65:35 disadvantage to MK. MK player are all playing to the same strengths. If you can read the player well enough, beating MK is not nearly impossible.

 

[Cirno]

IMO, this is a major factor. I'm in the same boat; I believe Peach vs MK to be 65:35 once the MK truly understands the matchup (luckily, few do).

G&W's equally bad (65:35), but hey...we can counterpick him.

MK? Who do I counterpick? G&W doesn't make my character unviable, because I can pick a second. But if MK is legal, it not only makes my character unviable, it utterly screws over anyone with a bad matchup on him because they cannot counterpick.


I actually usually win MK dittos, so MK is now my second, just to beat MK (though I go Peach when I don't think they know the matchup, and usually win because I know exactly what to do). :/ This, to me, is absurd.

The counter picking argument is the only valid one I see from the pro-ban and the one I think we should be focusing on.

• As we all agree he is beatable.
  
  Which makes sense as broken characters don't go to the last stock against anyone when the best player of the game is behind him, let alone lose.
  
• The overcentralaztion thing is difficult to take any action on because it seems to be more a matter high popularity than anything.
  
  This isn't the first time a game has had a character with no bad matchups, but in my competitive gaming experience, this is the first time such a majority of players has flocked to one character. If the first point is true as it is for other games, why did these other games not have a similar turnout? MK is either just really popular for whatever reason each person holds (fans of the Kirby series,fun to play, popular opinion) or we need to look at the first point again.
  
  
  
• The most sensible reason for banning would be that he has no counterpicks.
  
  But again this is not the first time this has happened. Most notably with Yun from SF: 3rd Strike who had one even matchup with Makoto, and then pure advantage across the board.
  Yet Kens and Chun-Lis were the main ones winning tournaments due to them having so many backing players. The question I believe we need to ask ourselves is:
  
  "Why was this ok for the 3rd strike tournament scene but a cause for ban in the Brawl tourney scene?"
  
  The only thing I can think of myself would be that the Smash Brothers series also has the unique aspect of stage counterpicking. Which can alter MKs 65:35 matchup with Peach into 85:15 rendering her unviable. I thought about Delfino too, but it really just changes the way you have to play against +4 jumpers.
  
  But even then considering that as an extreme( extreme in the sense that we conclude he has at worst even like Yun and can counterpick it for an advantage), wouldn't it call more for a 'no stage counterpicking' rule than a ban of the character?
  
  
  I personally don't believe MK should be banned, but when players like Xyro, Snakee and yourself who I consider skilled are calling for ban I have to ask so I can see it from your perspective so no matter the outcome we can move as a community towards a better metagame.
  

 

[Woozle]

As much as I hate to be uninformed...

Can someone direct me towards the tournaments that this thread refers to?

I know WHOBO is in the OP, but the others- Even names?

I'm not wholly involved with upper-level tournaments, so I wouldn't know exactly where to look.

 

[Ravin]

Ill use a SF reference because everyone seems to be drawn to the Akuma thing.

How do you think the Akuma mains felt at the time when he dominated the tournament scene? Then they called for a ban and was banned? Oh no, they forced the community to play fair and help develop the gameplay and it still is played?

QQ?

Its only a matter of time.

I also like how the last few polls have been a "Fraction" short of a ban, but with the "Not Sure" Poll, seems 12% dont even know what to say.

 

[Woozle]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn9_pBEigGU&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VROmDsbN6mQ&feature=channel_page

That is a character that is supposedly at a 65:35 disadvantage to MK. MK player are all playing to the same strengths. If you can read the player well enough, beating MK is not nearly impossible.

I don't think that's a particularly sound argument.

Your random sample of '1' doesn't truly provide an overview of the matchup, imo.

And I hope the pro-ban side's argument isn't "you can't beat him". That's silly.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I know exactly what status quo means and currently the status quo is cheering for a Metaknight ban. That position has been unchanged pretty much since before the game came out. Very simple to see... but hey, I'm braindead, what do I know? lol

Um no. By definition the status quo is the current state of affairs. Please stay in school, kid.

 

[Woozle]

I find it amusing that, as a community that insists on the importance of the counter-pick, they allow the only character who needs no secondary to run rampant through their tournies.

:]

 

[Ravin]

Um no. By definition the status quo is the current state of affairs. Please stay in school, kid.

But he did state what the current status quo is....? Just not the definition? Technically he is right?
The current state of affair is the ban or not to ban MK?

xD

 

[MetalMusicMan]

Um no. By definition the status quo is the current state of affairs. Please stay in school, kid.

Exactly--how does that in any way not fit contextually with what I said or how I used it? lol

Weeeeeeee. Fail.

But he did state what the current status quo is....? Just not the definition? Technically he is right?
The current state of affair is the ban or not to ban MK?

xD

Thank you, lol.

 

[Ravin]

<.< BUT MK does have a secondary. I often switch from red to white if I'm not sure on who they are going to pick. Red seems to do well against low tiers, while white and black dominate the high tiers.

 

[BOB SAGET]

sry, i lost my temper. anyway im tired of typing the same thing over and over again. so heres my quote from last night. even though it may sound like a flamers post. it has some valid points: stop arguing, your not going to make a difference. we have no control on wat the **** will happen. the main point pro bans make is that MK should be banned because he has no counter pick. where do u get this crap from. the matchup list where noobs make the decision. BS. another thing the probans say is tha MK wins all the tournaments. well maybe everyone uses MK because all those noobs say he has no counter pick, so his metagame developed already. temp ban wont do crap. once u ban him its not gonna stop the people who main to practice further with him. so if u guys r whinning because u cant beat metaknight. its your ****in fault. so stop being a little suck and figure out a way to beat him!

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

I don't think that's a particularly sound argument.

Your random sample of '1' doesn't truly provide an overview of the matchup, imo.

And I hope the pro-ban side's argument isn't "you can't beat him". That's silly.

Anti-ban guys have been parading around saying things like

"He's beatable." Yeah, we know. We know already. No one has said anything like "MK is an unbeatable character.

"If you ban MK, you'll want to ban Snake too!" No we wouldn't, that's stupid and it's not even a valid argument. Go read up on how to debate.

"Banning him effectively makes every match 0:100 for Meta Knight! He can't beat anyone if he can't play!" Uh yeah, that's the point of banning a character.

"You're all a bunch of crybabies!" Maybe, but we're crybabies with a good argument which has been presented a number of times. The only thing I see anti-ban guys doing is saying the things in this list.

"lol ur bad" Ad hominem

"M2K says you're a crybaby" Appeal to authority

"These guys have practiced a ton on this character!" Irrelevant

I'm sure there are more.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

But he did state what the current status quo is....? Just not the definition? Technically he is right?
The current state of affair is the ban or not to ban MK?

xD

Um, no. The status quo is how things are written into law at the time. That's how this works. The status quo isn't that the majority want something. The status quo is and never can be an opinion.

EDIT: Let me restate:

Status quo is the current rule. If you are trying to change a rule, even one with popular support, you are fighting the status quo, not part of it.

 

[Ravin]

There is a huge difference to "It being our fault" and "33% of all players use MK in tounriments" Meaning, 1 of 3 players you will fight would be MK.

You would think with all the MK's flying around, you would think with sooooo much practice, we would have something by now.

But we don't. Logic stands over your rationality.

We know we have MK slayers, but thats only five people, and they still dont beat M2K, DSF and ect. They remain in top 10, but not top 5, was it?

@ Paris - You keep changing your words. Its hard to follow anything you are saying at this point.

 

[Woozle]

@Supermodel

So what sound, valid conclusions are baing argued by the pro side at the moment? ANd what are the premises?

Hate to get technical ~

 

[BOB SAGET]

There is a huge difference to "It being our fault" and "33% of all players use MK in tounriments" Meaning, 1 of 3 players you will fight would be MK.

You would think with all the MK's flying around, you would think with sooooo much practice, we would have something by now.

But we don't. Logic stands over your rationality.

We know we have MK slayers, but thats only five people, and they still dont beat M2K, DSF and ect. They remain in top 10, but not top 5, was it?

@ Paris - You keep changing your words. Its hard to follow anything you are saying at this point.

explain your logic.

 

[tekkie]

Another popular one is "The tournament winners are the best regardless of who they use and they just happen to use MK", which can be restated as "They're the best, so you don't deserve a chance to compete (unless you start using MK LOLOL)".

Which would you rather face: M2K with MK or M2K with Dedede?

 

[Ravin]

Ive posted it several times. You cussing out rampantly, though i would be frustrated if i did the same as you, doesnt prove the point. Many legitimate reasons still stand against the MK issue. But you main MK, I understand and respect your want to not ban him and enjoy playing him.

Hell, I enjoy playing him..

But from a compeitive stand point and for the choice and understanding of the CP System and Logic you cant have MK for this game to further develope.

@ Least if M2K used D3 we could CP and fight him according. Thats all that is really being said about the MK situation.

Id honestly like to fight his D3.

 

[Woozle]

Another popular one is "The tournament winners are the best regardless of who they use and they just happen to use MK", which can be restated as "They're the best, so you don't deserve a chance to compete (unless you start using MK LOLOL)".

Which would you rather face: M2K with MK or M2K with Dedede?

No Captain Falcon option? :<

 

[MajinSweet]

Another popular one is "The tournament winners are the best regardless of who they use and they just happen to use MK", which can be restated as "They're the best, so you don't deserve a chance to compete (unless you start using MK LOLOL)".

Which would you rather face: M2K with MK or M2K with Dedede?

Yeah but whats the difference? If you ban MK they will just start using the second best character, and you will still be at a large disadvantage. But if you, yourself use that second best character then you will have a better shot. MK isn't some auto win, so there isn't a reason to ban.

 

[The Sauce Boss]

sry, i lost my temper. anyway im tired of typing the same thing over and over again. so heres my quote from last night. even though it may sound like a flamers post. it has some valid points: stop arguing, your not going to make a difference. we have no control on wat the **** will happen. the main point pro bans make is that MK should be banned because he has no counter pick. where do u get this crap from. the matchup list where noobs make the decision. BS. another thing the probans say is tha MK wins all the tournaments. well maybe everyone uses MK because all those noobs say he has no counter pick, so his metagame developed already. temp ban wont do crap. once u ban him its not gonna stop the people who main to practice further with him. so if u guys r whinning because u cant beat metaknight. its your ****in fault. so stop being a little suck and figure out a way to beat him!

You are seriously the worst.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

@Supermodel

So what sound, valid conclusions are baing argued by the pro side at the moment? ANd what are the premises?

Hate to get technical ~

Here is why I posted earlier in the thread. I think it is pretty sound and very logical:

No one claims Meta Knight is unbeatable. He is beatable. The problem is that by not playing him, you are committing yourself to doing twice or sometimes three times as much work as if you'd just picked and played him. Given that the people who want to win are the guys who aren't going to make things more difficult than they have to be, it is reasonable to assume that competitive players will choose Meta Knight for their main.

A lot of people love to cite things that come directly out of "Playing to Win," and much of that is correct. During the section of that book that discusses bans, the author correctly states that:

Only in the most extreme, rare cases should something be banned because it is “too good.” This will be the most common type of ban requested by players, and almost all of their requests will be foolish. Banning a tactic simply because it is “the best” isn’t even warranted. That only reduces the game to all the “second best” tactics, which isn’t necessarily any better of a game than the original game. In fact, it’s often worse!

The only reasonable case to ban something because it is “too good” is when that tactic completely dominates the entire game, to the exclusion of other tactics. It is possible, though very rare, that removing an element of the game that is not only “the best” but also “ten times better than anything else in the game” results in a better game. I emphasize that is extremely rare. The most common case is that the player requesting the ban doesn’t fully grasp that the game is, in fact, not all about that one tactic. He should win several tournaments using mainly this tactic to prove his point. Another, far rarer possibility is that he’s right. The game really is shallow and centered on one thing (whether that one thing is a bug or by design is irrelevant). In that case, the best course of action is usually to abandon the game and play one of the hundreds of other readily available good games in the world.

Only in the ultra-rare case that the player is right and the game is worth saving and the game without the ultra-tactic is a ten times better game—only then is the notion even worth fighting for. And even in this case, it may take time for the game to mature enough for a great percentage of the best players and tournament organizers to realize that tactic should, indeed, be banned. Before an official ban takes place, there can also be something called “soft ban.”

It is reasonable to say at this point that the game is all about Meta Knight. Meta Knight is so powerful as a character that it is reasonable to assume that in order to place in large tourney such as Genesis, it is wise to at least second him. He's the Ace in the Hole. He's the secret weapon. When all else fails, Meta Knight is a good match-up. Every time. So players choose to play him en masse, which is what we're seeing. Top 5 here, top 8 there, top 10 elsewhere. It doesn't really matter. The bottom line is, MK wins tournaments. It's a formula that works. It would be different if it were 4-6 characters such as in melee, but in this case, its' one character and everyone wants a piece of it.

So now we've hit a situation where someone wants to go to their first tourney. They get there, and the people who want to win, those who are placing, have picked MK. Our friend mains Toon Link, or some other C- or D-tier character. But he plays to win. He doesn't want to be a scrub (http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html). So next time, no excuses. He will do what it takes, and it takes playing Meta Knight.

Meta Knight:

* "dominates the game to the exclusion" of all other characters.
* is the metagame. Banning him would make for a better, more versatile and less selective game.
* is "ten times better than anything else in the entire game." He is the only character in the game with no counterpicks (characters or stages). The best anyone has mentioned in this thread is that he has 50:50 match-ups. Not only is that arguable at best, it isn't a counterpick. Players of other characters not only have multiple 50:50s, but also many 40:60s that they will actually go ahead and play. It Meta Knight players are counterpicking 50:50s, what does that say about the character?
* is centralizing the game. The entire game is based around how well you can do against Meta Knight. No, it isn't because he is an unbeatable character, it is because he is 100% safe and thus you are bound to play more Meta Knights than any other character on your way up the ladder. That is fact. If you want to win, you are playing Meta Knight, because Meta Knight is the only character that has a truly even match against Meta Knight.
* is a character we are better off without. He offers nothing to the experience. Brawl is a good game despite the heckling around here, and it is a game worth saving. Meta Knight will be the death of it before banning him will.


Vote yes to banning this joke character.

 

[BOB SAGET]

Ive posted it several times. You cussing out rampantly, though i would be frustrated if i did the same as you, doesnt prove the point. Many legitimate reasons still stand against the MK issue. But you main MK, I understand and respect your want to not ban him and enjoy playing him.

Hell, I enjoy playing him..

But from a compeitive stand point and for the choice and understanding of the CP System and Logic you cant have MK for this game to further develope.

@ Least if M2K used D3 we could CP and fight him according. Thats all that is really being said about the MK situation.

Id honestly like to fight his D3.

many consider snake to be a counter. and i consider both snake and wario as counters. the match up chart is basiclly all opinion. the main reason MK should be banned is because of his tournamnet wins. well most of the tournament matches i watched were very close.:burst:

 

[Praxis]

The counter picking argument is the only valid one I see from the pro-ban and the one I think we should be focusing on.

• As we all agree he is beatable.
  
  Which makes sense as broken characters don't go to the last stock against anyone when the best player of the game is behind him, let alone lose.
  
• The overcentralaztion thing is difficult to take any action on because it seems to be more a matter high popularity than anything.
  
  This isn't the first time a game has had a character with no bad matchups, but in my competitive gaming experience, this is the first time such a majority of players has flocked to one character. If the first point is true as it is for other games, why did these other games not have a similar turnout? MK is either just really popular for whatever reason each person holds (fans of the Kirby series,fun to play, popular opinion) or we need to look at the first point again.
  
• The most sensible reason for banning would be that he has no counterpicks.
  
  But again this is not the first time this has happened. Most notably with Yun from SF: 3rd Strike who had one even matchup with Makoto, and then pure advantage across the board.
  Yet Kens and Chun-Lis were the main ones winning tournaments due to them having so many backing players. The question I believe we need to ask ourselves is:
  
  "Why was this ok for the 3rd strike tournament scene but a cause for ban in the Brawl tourney scene?"
  
  The only thing I can think of myself would be that the Smash Brothers series also has the unique aspect of stage counterpicking. Which can alter MKs 65:35 matchup with Peach into 85:15 rendering her unviable. I thought about Delfino too, but it really just changes the way you have to play against +4 jumpers.
  
  But even then considering that as an extreme( extreme in the sense that we conclude he has at worst even like Yun and can counterpick it for an advantage), wouldn't it call more for a 'no stage counterpicking' rule than a ban of the character?
  
  
  I personally don't believe MK should be banned, but when players like Xyro, Snakee and yourself who I consider skilled are calling for ban I have to ask so I can see it from your perspective so no matter the outcome we can move as a community towards a better metagame.

• 
  
  Very rational posting
  
  I'll address your comparison to Street Fighter IIIs, which I've sadly only played casually, not competitively (Chun-Li's strong punch = <3 ).
  
  There's a few things to note. First of all, when there are multiple characters with no bad matchups, the situation isn't so bad (example; Fox and Marth).
  
  There are three key differences between Brawl and Street Fighter 3s (other than the obvious).
  
  The first is the number of characters (39 vs 19).
  The second is stage counterpicking.
  The third is hitstun.
  
  I'll address these one by one.
  
  Number of Characters, And Their Matchup Distribution
  
  This is the least important difference, but there are twice as many characters in Brawl, making MK's dominance even more notable as more variety should be expected.
  
  I also want to note that, from my understanding, Yun has an even matchup with Makoto, and Chun-Li actually has a LARGER advantage on every character in the cast than Yun does, with her only disadvantage being to Yun.
  
  Meaning, if you play any character except Yun, Chun-Li is probably a worse matchup for you than Yun is.
  
  And finally, Makoto has no bad matchups except Chun-Li. Makoto, Yun, and Chun-Li are in the same tier because of this. Yun does not clearly dominate. Nobody suggests MK is in the same tier as the characters below him (except Inui).
  
  Essentially, the top three are for the most part equal, something nonexistant in Brawl. It's closer to Melee Marth/Fox/Sheik trio (Chun-Li being the Sheik).
  
  Stage Counterpicking
  
  Smash Bros uses stage counterpicks to increase or decrease matchup advantages. Being able to counterpick a stage beneficial to your character, or poor for your opponent, enables you to reduce a disadvantage in a matchup. Other fights do not have this.
  
  Metaknight breaks BOTH counterpicking systems (characters and stages) by not having a bad stage, either.
  
  
  Hitstun.
  
  This is the most critical, IMO. Consider the difference hitstun makes. If you can read your opponent, even with a disadvantaged character, you only have to catch one mistake and you can punish it with a combo that takes away a significant portion of your opponent's HP, or even a super. Zero deaths exist.
  
  In a game without significant hitstun, punishing one mistake (unless it's with a gimp, which virtually never happens to MK) is rarely enough to turn the side. You have to punish consistent mistakes. Which means that matchup gaps are MUCH MORE VISIBLE- you have to catch EVERY mistake, and when a character is capable of showing as few flaws as MK, that often means outplaying him by a wide margin.
  
  A 6-4 disadvantage in Street Fighter < a 6-4 disadvantage in Brawl.

 

[Woozle]

Yeah but whats the difference? If you ban MK they will just start using the second best character, and you will still be at a large disadvantage. But if you, yourself use that second best character then you will have a better shot. MK isn't some auto win, so there isn't a reason to ban.

If all the metaknights switch to snake, then everyone else can pick up DDD as a counter.

then the Snakes could pick up Pikachu (?) as a secondary, which would lead to some Game ans Watches popping up, and some other Pika counters...

But that would imply our goal is to encourage the counterpick system.

 

[BOB SAGET]

Very rational posting

I'll address your comparison to Street Fighter IIIs, which I've sadly only played casually, not competitively (Chun-Li's strong punch = <3 ).

There's a few things to note. First of all, when there are multiple characters with no bad matchups, the situation isn't so bad (example; Fox and Marth).

There are three key differences between Brawl and Street Fighter 3s (other than the obvious).

The first is the number of characters (39 vs 19).
The second is stage counterpicking.
The third is hitstun.

I'll address these one by one.

Number of Characters, And Their Matchup Distribution

This is the least important difference, but there are twice as many characters in Brawl, making MK's dominance even more notable as more variety should be expected.

I also want to note that, from my understanding, Yun has an even matchup with Makoto, and Chun-Li actually has a LARGER advantage on every character in the cast than Yun does, with her only disadvantage being to Yun.

Meaning, if you play any character except Yun, Chun-Li is probably a worse matchup for you than Yun is.

And finally, Makoto has no bad matchups except Chun-Li. Makoto, Yun, and Chun-Li are in the same tier because of this. Yun does not clearly dominate. Nobody suggests MK is in the same tier as the characters below him (except Inui).

Essentially, the top three are for the most part equal, something nonexistant in Brawl. It's closer to Melee Marth/Fox/Sheik trio (Chun-Li being the Sheik).

Stage Counterpicking

Smash Bros uses stage counterpicks to increase or decrease matchup advantages. Being able to counterpick a stage beneficial to your character, or poor for your opponent, enables you to reduce a disadvantage in a matchup. Other fights do not have this.

Metaknight breaks BOTH counterpicking systems (characters and stages) by not having a bad stage, either.


Hitstun.

This is the most critical, IMO. Consider the difference hitstun makes. If you can read your opponent, even with a disadvantaged character, you only have to catch one mistake and you can punish it with a combo that takes away a significant portion of your opponent's HP, or even a super. Zero deaths exist.

In a game without significant hitstun, punishing one mistake (unless it's with a gimp, which virtually never happens to MK) is rarely enough to turn the side. You have to punish consistent mistakes. Which means that matchup gaps are MUCH MORE VISIBLE- you have to catch EVERY mistake, and when a character is capable of showing as few flaws as MK, that often means outplaying him by a wide margin.

A 6-4 disadvantage in Street Fighter < a 6-4 disadvantage in Brawl.

your very wrong. FD is MKs worst stage.

 

[Ravin]

If you listen to what they say, they will tell you a win is a win no matter how its won. Hell, Look at PLANKING.

They dont care how close it was. They want the win. That will tell you the mindset of most MK players. As long as they win, its for the money. Why care for the metagame? If i pick up MK, i already have an edge over characters, I just have to work on my Tech chasing, shield pressure, Minor AT's, recovery, and throw in a few mindgames, and ill go play a bunch of people till i understand most playstyles and reliease my aerials and tilts have priority over everything. When you have a sword out prioritize a fully charged shot when just about nothing else but a reflector can do. You tend to go O_o....