Should Metaknight Be Banned? The Poll (LISTEN TO THE SBR PODCAST!)

[KevinM]

Did you want someone to disagree with your analysis of the tournament-placers and where they voted? It seemed pretty straightforward to me...

I meant the how this Poll isn't a good general outline is all silly.

 

[Ignatius]

But ban has more pink and not ban has more blue and green....

what do those colors mean again?

color breakdown:
Mod/admin: Red(also bolded)
Blue: Smash director(can modify the tournament calendar, pretty much anyone can be one that hosts tournaments)
Green: BRoomer - cool posters
Purple: SBR member
orange: Smash Write - people that won(I think?) one of the Write With Your Power contests in whatever room those people write in.
Pink: Debater - someone with access to the Debate room
Black: Hiemie

If you have access to a group, you can change your color at any time. For example, I can make my name Blue, Purple, or Green if I want to. I just really like Blue so I typically leave it at that.

 

[Kookie]

1000 Wii points says there will be 500 votes for the ban before there are 325 votes against the ban.

 

[Overswarm]

1000 Wii points says there will be 500 votes for the ban before there are 325 votes against the ban.

I'm tempted to make a bunch of alternate accoutns and vote no to get 10 bucks

 

[Kookie]

I'm tempted to make a bunch of alternate accoutns and vote no to get 10 bucks

As if I didn't already think of that . . .

Mwahahaha

 

[GofG]

I'm tempted to make a bunch of alternate accoutns and vote no to get 10 bucks

Did you not read the OP, overswarm?

 

[Demenise]

I'm tempted to say "No". That was my standpoint from the beginning.

However, looking at how the tournaments look right now, I'll have to say "Yes", but ONLY for a temporary ban. First of all, we need to get over the madness; everything revolves around Metaknight, while metagame development is lacking. We need more metagame development, no matter what the cost - even the loss of a character.

However, I don't oppose playing Metaknight in friendlies (a given.) Actually, I'd prefer that. That way, we'll be able to find strategies against Metaknight without getting the tournament scene wrecked. Then, if that day comes where Metaknight becomes beatable, we unban him.

Simple, really.

 

[payasofobia]

Then, if that day comes where Metaknight becomes beatable, we unban him.

He is already beatable. So, by your logic, we should ban him and then unban him right away.

 

[SothE700k]

You know what, **** it. I'm quitting Smash tournaments here and now. At first I thought that the mindset here was an isolated case (well, in a relative sense). But at every tournament, convention or even general gaming hangout like a comic book store there is at least one BigCraig or Tnga there to ruin everyone else's fun. So, **** it.

Super Turbo HD Remix is a month away at max, with Street Fighter 4 hot on its heels to remind people what competitive fighters really are. I swear to the Satan Crystals, the "pros" are the worst thing to happen to Smash, without a doubt. Way to take a fun game and try to not only turn it on its head, but ruin it for other tournament fans as well.

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

 

[Rh1thmz]

I'm seeing people delving deeper into a few characters that have potential against MK, such as those mentioned in that topic that was just recently made in the MK boards.

That would be this thread.

While the arguments aren't supported in the best fashion due to not really telling what MK can do to the possible "counter" characters, and the opinions are pretty radical (Bowser good against MK?!?!?), I could see these as slight possibilites of better matchups against MK, and I think that we should at least give a bit of time to discuss these matchups. Although these matchups will probably be still in slight favor of MK (Yoshi vs MK is still 55:45 in MK's favor in spite of Yoshi's INSANE counterpicking abilities (Corneria, Green Hill Zone >.<)), I think that we should wait just a little while longer and see out the discussion of these matchups before we actually jump to a final conclusion. It probably won't be found as true that these characters have better matchups against MK than the rest of the cast (or even most of the cast =\ ), but some of these newly-discussed characters could possibly have slight advantages on MK. If these characters are found to be about as good against MK as Falco or Snake are, though (which is probably what will happen), then I'd support a temporary ban. Just make sure to give us MK mains some warning time of the date of such a ban in advance so all of us are prepared and have a new main ready when the ban takes place, OK? =p

 

[CO18]

Wow, 59% Yes.

People are scrubs.

 

[Demenise]

He is already beatable. So, by your logic, we should ban him and then unban him right away.

I meant more beatable than he is now. Easier to beat. More strategies against him. Make it so he's not winning more than 50% of the tournaments. You get the gist.

 

[payasofobia]

Wow, 59% Yes.

People are scrubs.

People are scrubs because they are expressing their opinions?

Granted, they may be wrong opinions but....you know what? you are right...

Just kidding.

People do what they want, so if they find it fit to ban metaknight, so be it, even if they are uninformed noobs or intelligent people with a good reason to ban the great one.

 

[WakerofWinds]

I'm curious as to what definition of scrub we're using here...

I think it's being misused based off of quite a few of the possible definitions

 

[GofG]

WakerofWinds, we are using Sirlin's definition.

 

[Kookie]

I'm curious as to what definition of scrub we're using here...

I think it's being misused based off of quite a few of the possible definitions

Generally, it's just been used as an insult to someone with an opposing view of your own. In topics about Meta Knight, at least.

 

[WakerofWinds]

WakerofWinds, we are using Sirlin's definition.

Then they wouldn't be scrubs simply because they votes yes. You'd have to examine every single reason they chose "yes" before you labeled them as such.

 

[Kookie]

Then they wouldn't be scrubs simply because they votes yes. You'd have to examine every single reason they chose "yes" before you labeled them as such.

This is Smash Boards, where reason and logic are usually on break.

 

[JustKindaBoredUKno]

I find it funny.

People who support the ban around here seem to be the better players... ie; omni, myself... many of the tourney goers... i can't imagine many around here are far behind

and at the same time, Michigan is the least MK'ed state. Its because we know what a MK does to tourneys. We don't like it.

Opinions are opinions. But I gotta agree with OS most the way.

That and cuz he has the same hat as me

(don't flame my sig)

 

[salaboB]

WakerofWinds, we are using Sirlin's definition.

Sirlin's definition has no application to a discussion of what rules should be used in a tournament. Banning a character is a discussion of tournament rules. You are using it incorrectly if you ever utter it as a label for someone solely because they say MK should or should not be banned in the context of this discussion.

Now, if they show up at a tournament and say "You shouldn't play MK he's cheap" or go on and on about how people just shouldn't play as MK when he's allowed to be played -- that's Sirlin's definition of a scrub. But it's not what's going on here (Except when the occasional soft ban suggestion shows up, and that's mostly misunderstanding what a soft ban actually is).

 

[cman]

Wow, 59% Yes.

People are scrubs.

Dojo voted to ban MK too. Is he a scrub?

 

[Kookie]

Sirlin's definition has no application to a discussion of what rules should be used in a tournament. Banning a character is a discussion of tournament rules. You are using it incorrectly if you ever utter it as a label for someone solely because they say MK should or should not be banned in the context of this discussion.

Now, if they show up at a tournament and say "You shouldn't play MK he's cheap" or go on and on about how people just shouldn't play as MK when he's allowed to be played -- that's Sirlin's definition of a scrub. But it's not what's going on here (Except when the occasional soft ban suggestion shows up, and that's mostly misunderstanding what a soft ban actually is).

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Thumbs up.

 

[CR4SH]

Sirlin's definition has no application to a discussion of what rules should be used in a tournament. Banning a character is a discussion of tournament rules. You are using it incorrectly if you ever utter it as a label for someone solely because they say MK should or should not be banned in the context of this discussion.

Now, if they show up at a tournament and say "You shouldn't play MK he's cheap" or go on and on about how people just shouldn't play as MK when he's allowed to be played -- that's Sirlin's definition of a scrub. But it's not what's going on here (Except when the occasional soft ban suggestion shows up, and that's mostly misunderstanding what a soft ban actually is).

Well ****ing put.

It really bugs me when people call others scrubs when they don't seem to know what the word means, (or at least is generally accepted to mean, here on these boards).

Wow, 59% Yes.

People want to play a balanced game.

There, I fixed it.

 

[bigman40]

Or at least, a tad more balanced (still pretty horrid even w/o MK as far as balanced)

 

[Moosetracks]

I think really they are creatively expanding off of the meaning of scrub.

 

[Mmac]

Or at least, a tad more balanced (still pretty horrid even w/o MK as far as balanced)

I believe it would be somewhat more balanced without him...

or at the very least, 3-4 people dominating the scene instead of just one

 

[salaboB]

I think really they are creatively expanding off of the meaning of scrub.

It's no longer Sirlin's definition then

 

[bigman40]

Of course it would be more balanced without him, but how much more balanced is the question. Granted that it'll be about 5 characters that'll dominate now (they seem to beat up each other like it was in melee), but it's still far from being the amount of balance that we were hoping for.

 

[Guilhe]

Except that they still have just as small of a chance against DDD, GW, Falco, Snake, and Marth. I don't see how you can argue that replacing one with the other is making a case for low tiers to have an easier time.

From virtually impossible to hard matchup, your slim chances just got way better. If you go at tourneys after the ban, you will notice the difference.

 

[Fatmanonice]

I believe it would be somewhat more balanced without him...

or at the very least, 3-4 people dominating the scene instead of just one

Exactly. Snake actually has both stage and character counters as do King Dedede, Mr. Game and Watch, Marth, and Falco. Metaknight has no counters and basically one stage counterpick. I haven't voted yet but I can definately see the benefits of Metaknight getting banned.

 

[Mortimer]

Sirlin's definition has no application to a discussion of what rules should be used in a tournament. Banning a character is a discussion of tournament rules. You are using it incorrectly if you ever utter it as a label for someone solely because they say MK should or should not be banned in the context of this discussion.

Now, if they show up at a tournament and say "You shouldn't play MK he's cheap" or go on and on about how people just shouldn't play as MK when he's allowed to be played -- that's Sirlin's definition of a scrub. But it's not what's going on here (Except when the occasional soft ban suggestion shows up, and that's mostly misunderstanding what a soft ban actually is).

Actually, Sirlin's only talking about play mentality in his Playing to Win articles, nothing about creating tournament rules. So you're right!

From here: http://www.sirlin.net/archive/playing-to-win-part-1/#comment-38949

The Playing to Win articles and book are written for the *players*. When someone hands you a game to play, all you can do is go by the rules of the game and the rules of the tournament, and use everything possible to win.

Rashreflection is talking about the completely different concept of how game developers and/or tournament directors should make rules. “Playing to Win” never says one word about that.

 

[DMG]

I almost don't wanna vote for either side. Does this make me a bad person?

 

[Overswarm]

I almost don't wanna vote for either side. Does this make me a bad person?

No .

 

[The Real Inferno]

I should make a "neutral to a meta ban" group

 

[Turbo Ether]

I almost don't wanna vote for either side. Does this make me a bad person?

Nope, i'm undecided, so I didn't vote.

 

[Tony_]

People, its WAY to early to decide on a ban. Sure MK rewards bad players on a silver platter, but that can also be said of Game and Watch, as he also falls under MKs "how to use well range". G&W doesn't take much skill to use. MK basically takes none.

I say we wait until AT LEAST summer of 09. We could then see if MK is even ban worthy, and I gurantee then he won't be. He isn't even ban worthy now. =\

 

[Turbo Ether]

People, its WAY to early to decide on a ban. Sure MK rewards bad players on a silver platter, but that can also be said of Game and Watch, as he also falls under MKs "how to use well range". G&W doesn't take much skill to use. MK basically takes none.

I say we wait until AT LEAST summer of 09. We could then see if MK is even ban worthy, and I gurantee then he won't be. He isn't even ban worthy now. =\

Similar arguments have been made plenty of times in the past. Your opinion will be disregarded. Sorry.

 

[salaboB]

I say we wait until AT LEAST summer of 09. We could then see if MK is even ban worthy, and I gurantee then he won't be. He isn't even ban worthy now. =\

Please explain where you're basing this certainty on. Points have been presented for why the situation is most likely to only degrade as time passes, but you're saying it will improve. You need to actually have reasons behind this and not just a feeling or opinion if you want to convince anyone.

I almost don't wanna vote for either side. Does this make me a bad person?

Sit back and enjoy the show.

 

[Overswarm]

Similar arguments have been made plenty of times in the past. Your opinion will be disregarded. Sorry.

Don't apologize.

 

[Blackbelt]

Don't apologize.

Dude. harsh.



Awesome.