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

[RedyBz]

edit: nothing

 

[Mike B]

Comparing Pokemon tiers to Smash Bros tiers

I wish Brawl had 49 usable characters on the same tier.

 

[Alus]

You guys can expect a lot of people to quit if you ban him. Just sayin.

Then the tournies will be even more dead.

No matter what happens its a win-win for me!

Melee had a couple glitches banned, I'm pretty sure a lot of other games have glitches that are banned. Planking is banned for making tourney's last forever than because it's too good.


Stop spouting ignorant **** like a moron now m'kay? Bringing up glitches or strategies that slow down the game as a reason to ban him when we can ban those without any issue is ****ing ********, and shows how little you know about other fighters.

Where...at all...and how...in any way... did I say anything that relates to the idea that MK should be banned BECAUSE he had glitches? (aside from my summary.)

And where the hell did planking come from?

Whatever...i guess that was not the point...

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

I wish Brawl had 49 usable characters on the same tier.

:flame:
First of all, Thank's for not using the entire post and taking out of it only what you wanted to to try to make your point look good.

Secondly, for those of you that don't know, Pokemon now has around what, 500 characters? Has Brawl broken the 40 mark on characters yet?

And lastly, I've already stated how comparing RPGS to Fighting Games seems stupid. StreetFighter to Brawl is one thing. Pokemon to Brawl is another completely.

Edit:2skilled4u, you shouldn't be happy that people are leaving the community. It should be a good thing that lots of people are around. This vote and thread is about trying to find the best solution, ban, temporaryban, powerlimiting, non-ban, or whatever else could happen, rule changes etc.
:flame:

 

[Mike B]

:flame:
First of all, Thank's for not using the entire post and taking out of it only what you wanted to to try to make your point look good.

Secondly, for those of you that don't know, Pokemon now has around what, 500 characters? Has Brawl broken the 40 mark on characters yet?
:

Well thank you for going off on a pissrant then, without considering I didn't intend to denounce your post in any way!


Christ dude ....

 

[Alus]

:flame:

Edit:2skilled4u, you shouldn't be happy that people are leaving the community. It should be a good thing that lots of people are around. This vote and thread is about trying to find the best solution, ban, temporaryban, powerlimiting, non-ban, or whatever else could happen, rule changes etc.
:flame:

If you want my honest opinion I would strongly prefer MK being banned as a event... He isnt actually game breaking...he is just somewhat affecting the game in ways that lots of people are going to whine about until the end of time... And by having a shorter viarity of characters in the game (which...i guess is getting caused by MK *rolls eyes*)...learning your machup VS MK automatically increases your chances of winning a tourney by a decent set...

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

Well thank you for going off on a pissrant, without considering I didn't intend to denounce your post in any way!

:flame:
YOU JUST DID IT AGAIN! And nice job assuming I went on a rant AGAINST you. Maybe for all you know (and the reason why I did it) is that I prefer when people quote the whole message instead of just a part of it (unless they want to take part of it and turn it into a funny quote like "When Peach misses with her tilt, you have an opening straight into her" ). But yeah, I honestly do hate it when people don't fully quote, or worse, modify a quote. I didn't mean to be rude, an I am sorry.

Edit: And 2skilled4u, people are going to get pissed at something, and will wine about just about anything, from how Captain Falcon should be banned for being vulgar (using his up-b to thrust into princesses, small animals and little boys) to chain grabs, to camping, to anything else. While it's true that many smart players also moan about Metaknight, isn't it also true that just as many moan for him instead of against him? And if it is not true, then why would the SBR have had a 3rd vote for us to talk about, instead of simply outlawing him themselves, since many TOs follow their guidelines?
:flame:

 

[Mike B]

:But yeah, I honestly do hate it when people don't fully quote, or worse, modify a quote. I didn't mean to be rude, an I am sorry.[/COLOR]
:flame:

Well, sorry to do it again, but it helps focus on the point I am coming across when speaking. Im a little used to being a laidback guy, it sometimes scares me



On-topic, the reason for Meta Knight's existance is why we are all angry on the inside.

 

[Alus]

:flame:
I honestly do hate it when people don't fully quote, or worse, modify a quote.
:flame:

Oh ****!!!

10 o ****s!!!

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

Well, sorry to do it again, but it helps focus on the point I am coming across when speaking. Im a little used to being a laidback guy, it sometimes scares me



On-topic, the reason for Meta Knight's existance is why we are all angry on the inside.

:flame:
I am angry on the inside because of Ice-Climbers chain grabs. NOt everyone is angry for Metaknight's existance, although many can agree that Sakurai putting in triping (Sakurai is the true reason for Metaknight's existance) was stupid.

Edit:and skilled, DARN YOU! HOW DARE YOU! I SHALL SMITE YOU WITH THE POWER OF AURA!

Just kidding. I'm bored now.
:flame:

 

[Falconv1.0]

Where...at all...and how...in any way... did I say anything that relates to the idea that MK should be banned BECAUSE he had glitches? (aside from my summary.)

And where the hell did planking come from?

Whatever...i guess that was not the point...

Ok, if it has nothing to do with banning him, dont even mention it. And uh, I brought up abilities because you said 'glitches or not'. What the **** is banned besides planking and IDC on MK, I took your words at face value, dont play stupid with me.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
I can see the confusion behind it though. It was a comparison to Metaknight's banishment and other communities toward baning, which made it seem like a Metaknight ban arguement. It started from, I think Kyrai or someone like that, who made remarks comparing Metaknight to ST4's Sagat, and 2skilled4u said that Metaknight is only like that because he was powered down, to which I asked him what we did other than remove a glitch and a cheap way to play that everyone can use (granted not as good as MK can), at which point 2s4u asked me when people had removed glitches and other cheap tactics, at which case, I and Falcon responded, in our own ways.
:flame:

 

[Alus]

Ok, if it has nothing to do with banning him, dont even mention it.

Fine...ill be sure to do that next time

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

Fine...ill be sure to do that next time

:flame:
Ugh.... lets make sure to not stray too far from topic, no matter what is going on "Next Time"... *cuts self to release stress*
:flame:

 

[adumbrodeus]

I didn't know his statement said "Made DK unviable in all Infinite allowed tournaments"
I thought he just said Made DK unviable in all tournaments.
Cuz ya know, the worlds "infinite" and allowed" totally pop up in this sentence
>_>

That's cause the infinite being allowed is the standard ruleset, bum's region just likes it's variation.

Luigi.

Luigi can break out.

You're looking at the wrong recommended ruleset, dear. This is the one I was talking about.

This is smashboards, when we're talking about recommended rulesets, we talk about the smashboards one, not brawlscrubs.com's recommended ruleset, at least not without clearly indicating the context.

Which you did not, until now.

But now that we know... *proceeds to laugh at the Netherlands for it's scrubbish ruleset*

Seriously, their scrubbish ruleset has no impact on our ruleset.

There are no universal rulesets. The SBR one comes closest to universal, but that one just says "lol i dunno" regarding Dedede's infinite. So in absence of a proper universal ruleset, I based my statement on a national one.

And honestly, if a region doesn't ban the infinite, it consists of either *******es or obsessive "no johns" people.

...

But this is smashboards, hence the smashboards ruleset is the immediate reference.


Or... they could recognize that bad, even horrible match-ups happen, and recognize a band-aid fix isn't the way to go.

Excuse my ignorance, but how does MK destroy Marth?

One of my close friends hold up well with MKs, playing a defensive Marth. (Bruce Lee, art of the intercepting fist) Only occaisonally getting agressive with Fair combos to sweep MK across the stage. Obviously MK has speed, and is difficult to dodge, but doesn't Marth's quirks, power, and counterattack/parry keep him on a good MK level?

Marth's worst match-up and totally negates him competitively speaking because he pretty much does what Marth does, but better.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
adumbrodeus, are you anti, pro, or neutral ban? Not that I care, I'll treat you the same way, but your post had points for both sides, so I'm just curious if you've voted, have a stance, or are just posting.
:flame:

 

[adumbrodeus]

:flame:
adumbrodeus, are you anti, pro, or neutral ban? Not that I care, I'll treat you the same way, but your post had points for both sides, so I'm just curious if you've voted, have a stance, or are just posting.
:flame:

Anti-ban as always, thank you very much.

I have explained previously that pro-ban needs to do a lot more work to convince people (myself included) and even gave suggestions.

They have yet to satisfy the burden of proof with testing.


Not that I wouldn't love him to be just good enough to be banned, but he's not.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

Anti-ban as always, thank you very much.

I have explained previously that pro-ban needs to do a lot more work to convince people (myself included) and even gave suggestions.

They have yet to satisfy the burden of proof with testing.


Not that I wouldn't love him to be just good enough to be banned, but he's not.

:flame:
I voted antiban instantly last time, but that was because I was new to the boards and didn't know how good Metaknight was. This time, I wanted for quite a while before voting, waiting for the Proban to convince me that he deserved it or that good would come of it. It still has yet to happen.

I'm not completely shut off to them. If they can truly convince me that Metaknight actually is Bad for Brawl, or truly game breaking, or that the game would be a better experience without him, then I'd delete my account, and revote a new one on the Proban side. But that has yet to occur, and I don't think it ever will.
:flame:

 

[Kamikaze*]

Ally's falcon was a knee away from beating dojo at apex.

Don't ban pl0x

 

[aeghrur]

That's cause the infinite being allowed is the standard ruleset, bum's region just likes it's variation.

Meh, w/e. 1 statement/1 region was good enough to disprove an absolute statement.

 

[BentoBox]

Saw this posted by illinialex24:

This is the (near) future of brawl finals! Stop this madness!

Spoiler

I'm still anti-ban, but pro-ban arguments are more lol-tastic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4jYJ-Yjf3w

 

[LoyalSoldier]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4jYJ-Yjf3w

That is the only situation I was worried about with planking. When neither player wants to approach. Took them 6 minutes to lose the first stock.

 

[Red Arremer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4jYJ-Yjf3w

That match was amazing. I liked the part when Meta Knight grabbed the ledge.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
I once thought about a rule that said "If any player grabbed the ledge 5 times in succession without taking damage, that player must sacrifice one stock to continue the match, or forfeit". ******** as heck rule, but still, better than watching stuff like plank matches occuring. It's not just the character. He might be the best at it, but everyone can plank, and it's a matter of choice. But if players are choosing an quasi-unbeatable strategy (planking), that's the kinda thing that should be banned, not the character.
:flame:

 

[Falconv1.0]

Planking is not unbeatable, it's just incredibly stupid.

 

[cutter]

Wait... since when was it proven that Planking dominates tournaments?

...or was it yet another thing that was pre-emptively banned like D3's infinites?

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
Well, yeah, technically, only very very very unfair glitches are unbeatable, but still, it's hard to decide which a person would rather watch: a chaingrab until the 200%, or a planking for 6 minutes. Both are equally annoying and wastes of time.

And planking doesn't dominate tournaments.... it just makes what could be awesome matches turn into crap. I mean, look at the videos just posted. I might actually prefer watching a chain-grab fest... more kinetic energy involved, since most chaingrabs don't last for 6 frigging minutes.
:flame:

 

[cutter]

Neither D3's infinites nor planking have proven they are so dominant or overcentralizing that they warrant a ban.

 

[Da-D-Mon-109]

:flame:
The last 3 posts (this one included) have all been based on personal oppinion. I'm talking about the debate a bit, but I don't expect any of the information to be used critically unless specifically noted or relevant.

But still, both planking and infinites are bull-crap. -.- It just makes me want to rip my beating heart out and crush it with the Wiimote. Anything that an enemy does that lets you put the controller down, go get a drink and take a bathroom break, then come back to the game (hopefully he's done grabing you by then), pick it back up and then play again is cheap in my book, as is anything that literally stalls a match for 6 bloody minutes.
:flame:

 

[Eddie G]

Neither D3's infinites nor planking have proven they are so dominant or overcentralizing that they warrant a ban.

Have you even read his posts? It's all personal opinion. Sheesh.

 

[Tommy_G]

Neither D3's infinites nor planking have proven they are so dominant or overcentralizing that they warrant a ban.

D3's infinites have proven that they are so dominant that they warrant a ban. 1 grab= 1 loss of stock is broken and deserves to be banned.

Planking is different. As long as youre not an idiot, (or inexperienced to the situation) you can get people off the ledge.

 

[Cook Kirby]

No way. His lack of a projectile and his light weight help balance him out. As well as the fact that all of his special moves put him into helpless in mid-air. Anyway, what ever happened to playing Brawl for the fun of it? Ban a character, any character, and that fun goes, even if it's just in competitive play.

 

[Kinzer]

Don't forget MK's bad aerial top speed and/or mobility now.

 

[cutter]

D3's infinites have proven that they are so dominant that they warrant a ban. 1 grab= 1 loss of stock is broken and deserves to be banned.

Ban ICs infinites then? 1 grab = 1 stock loss.

And keep in mind, D3 can only standing infinite 4 characters (Bowser is not an infinite because it is finite) on the stage, and he can't infinite Mario, Luigi, and Samus until over 120%.

 

[Tommy_G]

D3 has the best grab in the game. you cant play against him and not get grabbed. IC shouldnt be able to get a grab for at least a good amount of percent if you space and take advantage of their desync delay. They cant infinite if there's only one.

Edit: i heard if he throws in a pummel attack here and there he can, besides >120 is death percent anyways

 

[cutter]

Charizard has a better standing non-tether grab than DDD. Just saying.

Also, the infinite only works on 4 characters (on 3 of them it's not a true infinite until over 120%). Why ban something specificially to artifically enhance those very few matchups?

 

[Red Arremer]

Variety! RAWR! [/pro-ban]

 

[Yuna]

I have nothing against Meta Knight or people that main him, but I'm getting a bit tired of seeing so **** many of them at tournaments--I've even started assuming that at least a handful of people play him because of tiers. I don't usually lose to Meta Knight (Wario and G&W being my pet peeves), but ****, I would like to see more variety.

Of course, not a permanent ban. That would be stupid. I'm just curious as to how tournaments would be like without Meta Knight.

So you think he should be at least temporarily banned because of popularity? I think we're the only Competitive community as obsessed with variety as we are.

That's something the Smash community will never understand. So many fighting games have a character where there's really no reason not to use that character because they have no bad matchups, and 6-4's against most of the characters in the game.. I'm going to make a comparison really quick to SFIV - According to a recent tier list made for SFIV (http://www.eventhubs.com/guides/2008/oct/17/street-fighter-4-tiers-character-rankings/), Sagat only has four matchups that are 5-5, the rest are in his favor. Why is Sagat not banned? Even if there are other characters that have no bad matchups alongside Sagat (Ryu), there's no reason to use them (Ryu) when you can have it even easier against the rest of the cast by using the one who is superior to him (Sagat). So why doesn't SFIV dwindle down to nothing but Sagat vs Sagat, and if it does, why don't they consider banning him?

We've been using this argument since the very beginning. The opposition ignores it in the hope of it going away.

There are better examples, of characters whose worst match-up is a 60-40, such as Yun.

The problem isn't that it's better to play MK in any situation, but it is better to play him when you don't know what your opponent will pick - then you don't run the risk of being put into one of those disadvantaged matchups. That means 2 out of 3 matches it's smartest to play MK - first round during double blind picks, and during your opponent's counterpick after you win one.

The only time you might try to do otherwise is if you know your opponent is a better player than you and you're hoping for a first round advantage so you can win on the third counterpick (You'd assume loss of the second round counterpick from the better opponent), but then a smart opponent would know they were better, pick MK, and likely beat you with the even chances.

Let me ask you this:

Just because masochists like to hurt themselves, should we do the same?

(No, I'm not calling other fighting communities masochistic for not banning characters. I'm trying to get some justification for why it impacts us what other competitive communities have done, if a ban of MK is determined to be the best option for Brawl.)

Stop acting like you haven't already seen this argument a zillion times before. The most pathetic thing is that you've pretended you haven't seen this before twice in two days now, as I brought up the exact same thing yesterday.

I've used it before and every time you went "Why should we emulate other communities?", I elaborated with "Because you're whining about how the scene is doomed if we don't ban MK, yet history shows us that is not true."

The "I'm senile/I haven't seen this before"-act doesn't work if your opponent has a good memory and who is prepared to call bull**** whenever he sees it.

I haven't said MK vs MK is the only future of Brawl, you're putting words in my mouth based on what others have said.

I have said that not playing MK is putting you at an immediate disadvantage, and no other character in the game is so immune to bad matchups, so the competitive game will be improved with him gone.

And we're telling you that there are several communities out there with characters in the same, ora better, situation as MK and tha their metagames flourished/are flourishing.

Clearly, we don't have to ban MK. Simply because the metagame would be better with him gone does not make the ban warranted. And with this bull**** logic, we're gonna have to ban more than just MK because there are several characters whose absense would make the metagame better!

Actually, it's been anti-ban doing the majority of "Soandso isn't banned so MK shouldn't be banned" or "Akuma is obviously broken and MK isn't so MK shouldn't be banned." I only started using the "SF2 HDR Akuma has been banned so what do you say about that?" argument because the past 2 debate threads were so full of comparisons to other, unrelated communities to support not banning MK.

And I soundly refuted that poorly researched, poorly thought-out argument of yours.

Really though, I don't think any other community is directly relevant to this discussion. It should be what's best for Brawl, not what was best for <insert random other fighter that you think is similar> here.

We don't ban to maximize anything. We do not ban to maximize diversity. We're not going to ban to do "what is best for Brawl". What happened to not talking in absolutes, eh?

...or was it yet another thing that was pre-emptively banned like D3's infinites?

... by some idiotic and scrubbish regions.

D3's infinites have proven that they are so dominant that they warrant a ban. 1 grab= 1 loss of stock is broken and deserves to be banned.

Pikachu has -80% chaingrab on Fox. 1 grab = almost instant death, puts him at KO-percentages. Ban?

D3's infinite does not dominate the metagame, it merely dominates two characters. This is not grounds for a ban. Those two characters are just unviable now.

Edit: i heard if he throws in a pummel attack here and there he can, besides >120 is death percent anyways

Yes, people "hear" a lot of things and assume they're true and argue their brains out about them without verifying their veracity.

The characters who requires pummels can break out until they have reached at least 137 or some such percents since the pummel is friggin' slow. So he can only infinite DK. For Bowser, he can walking chaingrab him slowly across the edge. Everyone else can break out once the throw has staled.

Wolf is a special case because he gets infinited only at the ledge, though one can chaingrab him to the ledge sometimes. King DeDeDe himself gets owned by himself, does anybody care?

For the rest, he can infinite them only once they have reached a certain percent, at which time they can no longer break out because of his ridiculously slow pummel. The point of "They cannot be infinited until 120% was to show that it only works once they enter killing percentages, it's not 1 grab = lose a stock.

Ally's falcon was a knee away from beating dojo at apex.

Don't ban pl0x

What are you talking about?

 

[teekay]

I think he's saying if someone can get so close to beating one of the best MKs with Captain Falcon, MK can't be that broken?

 

[swordgard]

I think he's saying if someone can get so close to beating one of the best MKs with Captain Falcon, MK can't be that broken?

Depends if m2k was sandbaggin, i dont give a shizzle about non tourney matches.