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

[salaboB]

Ummmm, I'm pretty sure that isn't the case. From what I remember, MK was always ridiculous, except that snake countered him. M2K played DDD, then MK figured out how to get around snake. At around the same point M2K switched over to MK, probably (the way I see it) because he realized that MK is the only way to go if you want to make money. It's not like m2k was the magic "make meta broken" pill.

MK was recognized as field clearing for Snake long before people realized he was so dominant -- that really began when they figured out how to fight Snake with him.

As far as M2K and MK, he doesn't want his source of easy wins taken away and recognizes no other character is nearly as effective. I don't blame him for this, except that it's selfish and these discussions are about what's best for the tournament scene -- having him claiming all these people who can beat him when he's MK (But haven't really done so when it counted, for whatever reason) is just misleading.

As far as why should he switch from his main, he's the one claiming other people can take down MK. So shouldn't he be willing to utilize those counters to thrash a few top level MK's in tournaments to prove his point? (Yes, it won't be as "fun" as MK but it would demonstrate that other characters have even-close to even matchups) It should be perfectly safe, no worse than him going MK vs. MK and he'd have the advantage of his opponent not being as familiar with that character as they are with an MK ditto. But he sticks to only using MK. It casts a lot of doubt, in my mind, to most of his claims that MK isn't as dominating as he appears to be -- and I suspect M2K knows he would lose more frequently using anyone else, and really just doesn't want that to happen. (Note: I am not saying he will lose anything close to a majority of his matches. He would still remain the best, but even the best can lose rounds occasionally and I think that rate would slightly increase without MK as a crutch for him)

And why is MK fun? Because he's got a broken number of options. For instance, I was reading in a different thread that he can end his shuttle loop at its top. That means when you shuttle loop, if something goes wrong, you just break out of it at the top rather than completing and facing whatever punishment you should have earned yourself for misusing it. Or you can attack right at the end. Or you can glide a bit and then attack (Or just land). His up-B recovery move alone exemplifies the problem -- he has a stupid amount of flexibility compared to everyone else. It would be awesome if every character had this many options, and would make for a much better game...but they just don't, and so MK is a problem.

 

[Dark Sonic]

he had no solid counter or stage counter for that matter.

Brinstar says hi.

But yeah, Fox had no real solid counters, but the stage itself could easily tilt a match into certain characters' favors (Marth and Falco say hi).

 

[Deoxys]

Did you just link to the match-up chart that everyone makes fun of for being highly inaccurate and use it as the thesis of your post.

Your idea was right but I might as well link to a dog taking a ****, Phanna had a great idea but no real experience.

Edit: never mind not even your idea was right, sure he didn't have matches that he didn't have absolute dominance in but he had no solid counter or stage counter for that matter. Sheik vs Bowser is a counter.. Marth vs Fox is even and or slight advantage being stage dependent.

So you're saying Fox doesn't have an unfavorable Falco matchup? I was pretty sure he did.

 

[RADskater00]

I'm am by no means an expert at smash bros. or brawl or metaknight, but i think it is stupid to ban him. The game has only been out for about 7 months right? You all should be giving it more time before a ban is in order, if it ever should be. Smash for me was never about who has the better moves, it was who used what they had the best. By that I mean who uses their moves the best, and who can predict what the other is going to do and get them to fall into your traps.

Smash is one of the 2 games i think i know, along with SOCOM. If any of you have ever played the old SOCOMS then you would know that some weapons are just not used b/c it is seen as a ***** move. The weapons are too good in certain situations so people who used them were called *****es. But these weapons could always be beaten. And as smash progresses people always branch out to other characters b/c playing one just gets boring.

 

[Deoxys]

For instance, I was reading in a different thread that he can end his shuttle loop at its top.

What thread is this? This is news to me. HUGE news.

 

[Praxis]

Well... if that's the case... why don't you teach us all a lesson in honor and gallantry and stop playing MK? Why dont you show us some of Ganon's untapped potential? If you're going to reprimand the Brawl community for johning and whining all the time, why don't you just do what you're preaching about... pick up another character... and go win a major tourney? Why? Because you know just as well as we do that someone else will just pick up MK and beat you senseless. Which is why when (not if) MK gets banned, it'll be you and all of your MK underlings that'll be johning and whining... not us.

Wow dude.

You win. Epic.

 

[salaboB]

What thread is this? This is news to me. HUGE news.

It was a post in the "Tips vs MetaKnight" thread. If it's incorrect, it only slightly impacts my point as his Up-B still has at least three different ways to end it and two distances it can go and that's just a crazy amount of options.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=5630153&postcount=257 was the post, it was discussing ways MK could survive having his special moves reflected (Ala a cape or in this case Pit's shield)

Edit: If it can be verified either way, that would be great. I appreciate knowing exactly what works and doesn't and can't get to a wii atm.

 

[Justblaze647]

I'm am by no means an expert at smash bros. or brawl or metaknight, but i think it is stupid to ban him.

This is reason enough for you to not even post in this thread...

 

[Deoxys]

This is reason enough for you to not even post in this thread...

So you're an expert?

It was a post in the "Tips vs MetaKnight" thread. If it's incorrect, it only slightly impacts my point as his Up-B still has at least three different ways to end it and two distances it can go and that's just a crazy amount of options.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=5630153&postcount=257 was the post, it was discussing ways MK could survive having his special moves reflected (Ala a cape or in this case Pit's shield)

I don't see it... Maybe I'm, blind or you meant to link to a different post?

 

[Praxis]

I'm am by no means an expert at smash bros. or brawl or metaknight,

I'll say.

And as smash progresses people always branch out to other characters b/c playing one just gets boring.

You're missing the inherent problem. People AREN'T branching out to other characters, because it's way too easy to win with MK. And this is causing the game to get boring.

You aren't going to be able to convince anyone to stop playing Metaknight because it's boring if they're making hundreds of dollars off of being boring. You're talking about a soft ban- "Let's not play MK, because it's boring/dishonorable to do so". This doesn't work in the real world, or at least the United States, because people will take the boring easy route if it makes them money, even if it makes the game less fun to everyone else.

And you can't blame them for that. That's proper competitive play. The only solution is to let the game stagnate and become boring MK dittos...or ban MK and retain the diversity.

 

[cutter]

This is bascially turning into the dark ages of MTG that was 2004-2005... Ravager Affinity was the best deck in the format with no bad matchups and no neutrals except the mirror match. Your best shot at beating Raffinity was Tooth and Nail, but even that deck still had a pretty solid disadvantage to Raffinity. Eventually everyone just played Affinity because it was VERY easy to pick up and it dominated everything.

Sound familiar?

The game was getting out of control. People were quitting Magic because of this "black hole" effect on the metagame. Wizards does the right thing by banning the 9 cards that were the engine of the deck. After that, IMMEDIATELY, the metagame became more diverse! Tooth and Nail, Ponza, MUC became the top decks, but they had weaknesses and disadvantages matchups! Against Affinity, you could stack your main deck and sideboard with all the artifact hate in the world, and you still would lose big time to that broken deck.

 

[Deoxys]

This is bascially turning into the dark ages of MTG that was 2004-2005... Ravager Affinity was the best deck in the format with no bad matchups and no neutrals except the mirror match. Your best shot at beating Raffinity was Tooth and Nail, but even that deck still had a pretty solid disadvantage to Raffinity. Eventually everyone just played Affinity because it was VERY easy to pick up and it dominated everything.

Sound familiar?

The game was getting out of control. People were quitting Magic because of this "black hole" effect on the metagame. Wizards does the right thing by banning the 9 cards that were the engine of the deck. After that, IMMEDIATELY, the metagame became more diverse! Tooth and Nail, Ponza, MUC became the top decks, but they had weaknesses and disadvantages matchups! Against Affinity, you could stack your main deck and sideboard with all the artifact hate in the world, and you still would lose big time to that broken deck.

MK always reminded me of Ravager, too (especially since Affinity mains MK). Remember what happened, though? Wizards did the WRONG thing before, by banning Skullclamp. At Nationals, the last tournament before the ban took affect, Ravager didn't even top 8, as Elf and Nail proved to be the best deck. Had Wizards left the metagame alone, it would still have become diverse as decks would be developed to beat Elf and Nail and the metagame would become the Rock/Paper/Scissors it was meant to be. (I predicted that exactly this would happen, just to toot my own horn)

Let's not make the same mistake Wizards did and ban something right before its counter appears!

Edit: also, MUC didn't really have counters because it ran off counters.

 

[salaboB]

You aren't going to be able to convince anyone to stop playing Metaknight because it's boring if they're making hundreds of dollars off of being boring. You're talking about a soft ban- "Let's not play MK, because it's boring/dishonorable to do so". This doesn't work in the real world, or at least the United States, because people will take the boring easy route if it makes them money, even if it makes the game less fun to everyone else.

MK may also be the least boring character there is, because he has so many options to every situation. I'm still waiting on confirmation of whether he can break out of his shuttle loop at its top or not, but even if he can't he can do more with almost any given enemy setup than anyone else in the game. Sure, a few situations certain characters can do more than him, but MK has the overall most options by a long, long way. And that's what makes him fun.

Now, if everyone could break out of their recoveries when they saw they were about to be punished (Like a shuttle loop -> glide -> attack whenever you need to) it would be different. Imagine if Bowser could drop into a stunned fall from his fortress by doing an fair, the extra flexibility and fun it would be -- you wouldn't be completely vulnerable and caught by your momentum when your opponent came at you from the side to smack you, but could punish or drive them off by good timing on ending the move. The whole game would be full of interesting attacks and counterattacks, trying to pull the responses and punish, basically what you see in an MK ditto. But it's not. So MK is an outlier, and while he may be the most fun it also is responsible for him being too effective.

Also, that flexibility is why I believe people won't find good ways to counter MK -- if they do find a tactic, most likely he'll just find one if not more options that counter that tactic if he's just given some time. So you'll win a tourney or two against skilled MKs, but then MK users will figure out what frames you're vulnerable at and break your counter to him, and things will be back where they started.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Ice Climbers really obliterates MK on Final Destination IMO.

From personal experience, I disagree with this. This is only if you can consistently land high damaging chain grabs and that's a pretty big IF considering he's almost as hard to chain grab as Jigglypuff and Pit and can easily get out with Nair if your timing is even slightly off. Metaknight still has way too easy of a time keeping the Ice Climbers seperate and if he gets you offstage all it takes it a shuttle loop or well placed dair to royally screw you over on Final Destination. Personally, I prefer Battlefield because I at least have some protection to camp with ice blocks and blizzards (both of which stop a majority of his approaches) under the platforms.

 

[cutter]

D

MK always reminded me of Ravager, too (especially since Affinity mains MK). Remember what happened, though? Wizards did the WRONG thing before, by banning Skullclamp. At Nationals, the last tournament before the ban took affect, Ravager didn't even top 8, as Elf and Nail proved to be the best deck. (I predicted that exactly this would happen, just to toot my own horn)

Let's not make the same mistake Wizards did and ban something right before its counter appears!

Skullclamp should have never even seen print. Even if they banned Ravager first, Skullclamp would have been an automatic 4-of in every single deck, just like it was back in the 'Clamp days. It still would have been banned.

When it comes to degenerate card draw and free spells post-clamp and Ravager, Wizards has really treaded far away from both of those abilities.

Skullclamp was the classic case of Wizards trying to make a sucky card in playtesting good, and instead it becomes broken. This has happened countless times over the course of the game.

 

[Deoxys]

Skullclamp should have never even seen print. Even if they banned Ravager first, Skullclamp would have been an automatic 4-of in every single deck, just like it was back in the 'Clamp days. It still would have been banned.

When it comes to degenerate card draw and free spells post-clamp and Ravager, Wizards has really treaded far away from both of those abilities.

Skullclamp was the classic case of Wizards trying to make a sucky card in playtesting good, and instead it becomes broken. This has happened countless times over the course of the game.

But you can just run a deck with Damping Matrix and counters that beats those decks.

Also, that flexibility is why I believe people won't find good ways to counter MK -- if they do find a tactic, most likely he'll just find one if not more options that counter that tactic if he's just given some time. So you'll win a tourney or two against skilled MKs, but then MK users will figure out what frames you're vulnerable at and break your counter to him, and things will be back where they started.

But the thing is, we won't KNOW if we ban him so early.

 

[cutter]

Dampening Matrix, just like other shitty hosers at the time, failed to stop Affinity.

 

[salaboB]

But the thing is, we won't KNOW if we ban him so early.

We know Captain Falcon's matchups, did we learn them because he's used heavily in tournaments?

We most certainly did not.

We learned them because people test with Captain Falcon, trying to find ways to make him work, trying to find ways to just destroy him -- in friendlies, usually.

MK will still be used in friendlies even if he's banned, for fun and to see if the new techniques work against him if nothing else. Why? Because he just is fun to use. He has an additional advantage over CF in that he'll also be played at tournaments that don't choose to follow the MBR's recommendations.

I'm sorry, but the argument that if MK is banned he'll stop being tested has been shot down repeatedly, do you have examples of characters that aren't ever used or tested with just because they can't be realistically used in most tournaments? Anything to back your point up beyond your opinion that for reasons unknown people will just drop MK and never look back?

Edit: Point of fact, I already used this same logic against this same argument from you in a different thread. If you have a response, you really should use it -- or quit saying the same things without anything backing them up.

 

[DMG]

Guys, Magic /=/ Smash. This isn't a deck discussion, a "Which card is more broken" discussion, so let's leave the paper out of this.

 

[Skler]

Well... if that's the case... why don't you teach us all a lesson in honor and gallantry and stop playing MK? Why dont you show us some of Ganon's untapped potential? If you're going to reprimand the Brawl community for johning and whining all the time, why don't you just do what you're preaching about... pick up another character... and go win a major tourney? Why? Because you know just as well as we do that someone else will just pick up MK and beat you senseless. Which is why when (not if) MK gets banned, it'll be you and all of your MK underlings that'll be johning and whining... not us.

If MK wins why don't you pick him up and win a tournament?

M2K shouldn't drop his main just because you asked him to. Why don't you prove MK completely dominates by picking up MK and winning a national tournament? Probably because you have a main you don't want to drop. Do you see why your argument sucks?

 

[Ulevo]

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Allcharactermatchupschart.PNG

Excuse me? Fox had counters. Obviously. Even if he didn't, he didn't completely dominate the metagame like Meta-Knight is.
Fox was hard to beat, but not nigh-impossible. Meta-Knight is nigh impossible.
Get your facts right before you post about Melee.

Fox does not have counters. A counter is defined by ratio as a 7:3 advantage. You're stupid if you think any character to date has a 7:3 advantage on Fox. Many credible tournament renown players along with the most comprehensive guide for Fox ever made specifically state that Fox doesn't have any bad match ups at all. Even Marth, who had a CG leading to an FSmash was considered to go even at best. You do not know what you're talking about.

You can't be very good if you think Meta Knight is near impossible to beat. Near impossible is a rather drastic set of odds.

Well... if that's the case... why don't you teach us all a lesson in honor and gallantry and stop playing MK? Why dont you show us some of Ganon's untapped potential? If you're going to reprimand the Brawl community for johning and whining all the time, why don't you just do what you're preaching about... pick up another character... and go win a major tourney? Why? Because you know just as well as we do that someone else will just pick up MK and beat you senseless. Which is why when (not if) MK gets banned, it'll be you and all of your MK underlings that'll be johning and whining... not us.

Are you stupid? M2K is easily the best Smash player in the world right now. He has consistently won tournaments with both Dedede, and Meta Knight. Even against other Meta Knights, he himself dominates most players. He 3 stocked DSF at Hobo11 in less than two minutes. DSF is one of the best players out there. M2K will continue to win tournaments consistently, regardless if Meta Knight remains around. He is not obligated to teach you the obvious, or show you that Meta Knight doesn't need to be banned, simply because you yourself are too ignorant to realize it. If anything, rather than criticizing him, you should be paying attention to what it is he is telling you and the rest of the community, because he is ten times more knowledgeable, experienced, and skilled then you are.

If you as a student of Smash feel like you need to walk into the community classroom and preach to the teacher about how the game works, then you're going to look like an idiot for it.

 

[salaboB]

Are you stupid? M2K is easily the best Smash player in the world right now. He has consistently won tournaments with both Dedede, and Meta Knight. Even against other Meta Knights, he himself dominates most players. He 3 stocked DSF at Hobo11 in less than two minutes. DSF is one of the best players out there. M2K will continue to win tournaments consistently, regardless if Meta Knight remains around. He is not obligated to teach you the obvious, or show you that Meta Knight doesn't need to be banned, simply because you yourself are too ignorant to realize it. If anything, rather than criticizing him, you should be paying attention to what it is he is telling you and the rest of the community, because he is ten times more knowledgeable, experienced, and skilled then you are.

M2K has claimed repeatedly that MK can be beaten by a wide variety of characters. The challenge is for him to put his money where his mouth is -- he's the best, so if these other characters really go even/slight advantage versus MK, he should be able to use them in tournament to win at no cost to himself. Let me get a quote of mine that you conveniently skip over by the post you chose to respond to:

"As far as why should he switch from his main, he's the one claiming other people can take down MK. So shouldn't he be willing to utilize those counters to thrash a few top level MK's in tournaments to prove his point? (Yes, it won't be as "fun" as MK but it would demonstrate that other characters have even-close to even matchups) It should be perfectly safe, no worse than him going MK vs. MK and he'd have the advantage of his opponent not being as familiar with that character as they are with an MK ditto. But he sticks to only using MK. It casts a lot of doubt, in my mind, to most of his claims that MK isn't as dominating as he appears to be -- and I suspect M2K knows he would lose more frequently using anyone else, and really just doesn't want that to happen. (Note: I am not saying he will lose anything close to a majority of his matches. He would still remain the best, but even the best can lose rounds occasionally and I think that rate would slightly increase without MK as a crutch for him)"

Also, M2K has been miserly about what he tells the community. The only advice he's given to fight MK are ways to deal with approaches by bad to mediocre MK players. He didn't provide any significant help against the skilled ones -- like himself. You can't make it out like he's some great philanthropist only out for the good of Brawl, M2K is looking out for M2K and who cares how good the competitive scene is.

If MK wins why don't you pick him up and win a tournament?

This is what many people have been doing. Like Overswarm.

 

[Deoxys]

Does it occur to you that M2K doesn't want to throw all his practice with MK down the tubes for a while just to prove a point?

I'm sorry, but the argument that if MK is banned he'll stop being tested has been shot down repeatedly, do you have examples of characters that aren't ever used or tested with just because they can't be realistically used in most tournaments? Anything to back your point up beyond your opinion that for reasons unknown people will just drop MK and never look back?

Edit: Point of fact, I already used this same logic against this same argument from you in a different thread. If you have a response, you really should use it -- or quit saying the same things without anything backing them up.

Sorry, I forgot I'm supposed to read every post you've ever made. Banning MK will justify all the johns, and people will start to say he can't be used in friendlies, too.

 

[Fatmanonice]

I don't know what to say about the whole "let's wait until a counter is found" arguement. On one hand, this would be common sense it other situations but, on the other, making this statement kind of neglects all the work that has already been put into finding ways to counter Metaknight both with stages and characters. You also have to consider that he's the only top/high tier character that has continued to get genuinely better as time has pasted.

Remember when people used to complain about Snake all the time? Counters were found and he has become managable with most of the characters. This hasn't happened with Metaknight despite the amount of work people who use every other character have put into trying to find a way to knock him down a peg. Shiek had a tilt lock on him but then Metaknight players quickly found a way around it. Bowser had good release grab options against him but then they found a solution to that too. Snake had a grab release into ftilt/utilt against him and then Metaknight players found a way around that. Yoshi can grab release him into a fair spike at like 50% and he's STILL not a Metaknight counter because of everything else that Metaknight can do in the match up.

The only reason Metaknight has been slightly falling in his lead as of late is because 1. some people are not playing him as much because of the stigma and 2. because of people being told that this whole issue will just blow over if Metaknight players just lay low for awhile. It could be argued that Metaknight is so good because of "development" on the part of his community but, like someone else said, its because he has so many options and, like I said earlier, he can thwart some character's most complex strategies with simple actions. It's like Mario where we're still trying to find a way to break out of King Dedede's chain grabs despite all sorts of testing but Metaknight can do it with a well timed nair, shuttle look or mach tornado as well as all the options he has avoiding getting grabbed in the first place. What takes months of work with other characters usually takes a matter of days with Metaknight, because, as I've said time and time again, he's that user friendly.

Add in: @ Deoxyes:

Do you reeeeeeeeeeally think he would have that hard of time picking Metaknight back up if he used other characters in competitions for a week or two? If he used someone like Zero Suit Samus, Shiek, Yoshi, or Sonic I could understand your arguement but Metaknight is so easy to use compared to most of the cast and his strategies are so universal that most people could probably drop him for months , pick him back up, and still be amazing with him.

 

[Espy Rose]

If anything, rather than criticizing him, you should be paying attention to what it is he is telling you and the rest of the community, because he is ten times more knowledgeable, experienced, and skilled then you are.

I lol'd. I wouldn't take anything coming from a guy who whines about ledge camping too seriously...

 

[Deoxys]

I lol'd. I wouldn't take anything coming from a guy who whines about ledge camping too seriously...

M2K whines about ledge camping?

 

[salaboB]

Does it occur to you that M2K doesn't want to throw all his practice with MK down the tubes for a while just to prove a point?

Frankly, I don't believe he has a point. If he cares enough about it, he'll prove it. But that assumes he has something he can actually demonstrate.

Until a skilled anti-ban MK steps up and actually shows there's fact behind these claims of him being defeatable, all they're doing is blowing smoke to try to keep their easy money alive.

M2K will still be able to play MK for fun in friendlies. He'll still be able to do money matches (And stomp all over people) with him (Which is more money). If MK is banned from tournies, he'll just have to play one tournament's worth of matches without MK (At the ones that actually ban him, which I don't expect to be every tournie) -- and if the game isn't fun at all that way, then maybe it's best off if he doesn't play it. If he really can't stand to see that happen, don't you think it's worthwhile for him to demonstrate that the characters he's saying "Yes this guy can counter MK" actually can do so, when it actually counts?

Anyone not maining MK has to have a secondary. Why does M2K need to be so different and not have anyone else he has to maintain skill with? Why are you defending that?

Sorry, I forgot I'm supposed to read every post you've ever made. Banning MK will justify all the johns, and people will start to say he can't be used in friendlies, too.

It was a post in response to you. I don't expect you to read every post I make, but I did kinda figure you'd keep track of direct responses. And this is not evidence. This is like saying "If MK is banned, someone will release a hack to remove him from character selection. That's proof that he shouldn't be banned because he'll never be played again." That is opinion, there is nothing backing it up.

Why would anyone but scrubs you don't want to play against anyway ban MK from friendlies because he's banned in tournaments? Even if he's banned, fighting MK forces you to react and predict well and so is excellent general Brawl practice.

 

[Gea]

Remember when people used to complain about Snake all the time? Counters were found and he has become managable with most of the characters.

Since when did Snake have a solid counter? The closest you get is DDD... and most of the matchups are still not managable for the majority of the cast. Snake can shut down characters like nobody's business.

I think the problem with using this argument is that on the whole, there aren't many GOOD snake players out there as opposed to metaknight. The ones I do see still wreck shop to a ridiculous degree and even give his so called "counters" massive trouble, to the point that the character boards discussing the matchup consider it stage dependant or evenish.

Let me go on to say, and clarify, that I don't think Snake is on the same level as Meta, but bringing Snake up as, "Look, we sure knocked him down a peg, but we can't seem to do the same for Meta." is somewhat of a poor statement to make.

And for the record, every character's metagame has evolved. Some more than others.

tl;dr? There aren't as many snakes at tournaments.

 

[Ulevo]

M2K has claimed repeatedly that MK can be beaten by a wide variety of characters. The challenge is for him to put his money where his mouth is -- he's the best, so if these other characters really go even/slight advantage versus MK, he should be able to use them in tournament to win at no cost to himself. Let me get a quote of mine that you conveniently skip over by the post you chose to respond to:

"As far as why should he switch from his main, he's the one claiming other people can take down MK. So shouldn't he be willing to utilize those counters to thrash a few top level MK's in tournaments to prove his point? (Yes, it won't be as "fun" as MK but it would demonstrate that other characters have even-close to even matchups) It should be perfectly safe, no worse than him going MK vs. MK and he'd have the advantage of his opponent not being as familiar with that character as they are with an MK ditto. But he sticks to only using MK. It casts a lot of doubt, in my mind, to most of his claims that MK isn't as dominating as he appears to be -- and I suspect M2K knows he would lose more frequently using anyone else, and really just doesn't want that to happen. (Note: I am not saying he will lose anything close to a majority of his matches. He would still remain the best, but even the best can lose rounds occasionally and I think that rate would slightly increase without MK as a crutch for him)"

Also, M2K has been miserly about what he tells the community. The only advice he's given to fight MK are ways to deal with approaches by bad to mediocre MK players. He didn't provide any significant help against the skilled ones -- like himself. You can't make it out like he's some great philanthropist only out for the good of Brawl, M2K is looking out for M2K and who cares how good the competitive scene is.

This is what many people have been doing. Like Overswarm.

First off, M2K has stated that for the next while, he isn't going to be using Meta Knight. I am not saying he will hold this true to his word, but those are his words.

Secondly, if it concerns banning a character, it is on the responsibility of the community to prove that said character is ban worthy, not the other way around. He as a player has no obligation to prove anything by playing another character. I fully agree that he may simply be looking out for himself, but if I had to bet on whether or not "user123535" and M2K was correct, I would put my bets on him. He is by no means very good at debates, and arguing points is not one of his best assets, but there is truth in what it is he says.

As for M2K being more likely to lose if he didn't play Meta Knight. WELL DUH. We're arguing on whether or not Meta Knight is broken and needing a ban, not whether or not he is the best character. And guess what? You will lose more if you do not play the best character. Welcome to the competitive realm of gaming.

 

[Ulevo]

Since when did Snake have a solid counter? The closest you get is DDD... and most of the matchups are still not managable for the majority of the cast. Snake can shut down characters like nobody's business.

I think the problem with using this argument is that on the whole, there aren't many GOOD snake players out there as opposed to metaknight. The ones I do see still wreck shop to a ridiculous degree and even give his so called "counters" massive trouble, to the point that the character boards discussing the matchup consider it stage dependant or evenish.

tl;dr? There aren't as many snakes at tournaments.

The reasoning for this simply because Meta Knight is easier to play. Of course there are going to be more Meta Knights winning tournaments. Snake takes more time to learn and master, while Meta Knight is just pick up and go. That is why more people play him, and more people do well then him. That doesn't even mean that Meta Knight is better than Snake. I personally believe Snake is superior, but that isn't the relevant topic and I don't expect my opinion to be shared by a majority anyway.

The point is that people tend to think that because Meta Knight is easy, he is overpowered. No. The ease of something does not translate it's potential, it only allows someone to unlock the potential sooner, and much more efficiently.

 

[salaboB]

Secondly, if it concerns banning a character, it is on the responsibility of the community to prove that said character is ban worthy, not the other way around. He as a player has no obligation to prove anything by playing another character. I fully agree that he may simply be looking out for himself, but if I had to bet on whether or not "user123535" and M2K was correct, I would put my bets on him. He is by no means very good at debates, and arguing points is not one of his best assets, but there is truth in what it is he says.

The community has presented a rather lengthy (And growing) list of reasons why MK should be banned. Saying "The accuser must provide proof" only serves a point when the accuser hasn't provided proof. There have been many points made encompassing not only matchups but stage viability, tournament usage, tournament attendence, and metagame theory about why MK is bad for Brawl and only going to get worse.

If people want to show that MK isn't worthy of being banned, it's time to step up and start providing tournament results that show he can be opposed. Because all these months of the pro-ban people trying to do that have yielded only a growing number of MKs winning tournaments, players quitting, and more and more options for MK (Not his opponents.) being discovered as he's made to utilize the ridiculous number of options Sakurai gave him in response to the best attempts people have made at taking him down.

That's why challenges are being made to M2K and everyone who's saying other characters than MK can go even in tournaments against MK. Because there are reasons for banning him, and there's precious little evidence opposing them.

The reasoning for this simply because Meta Knight is easier to play. Of course there are going to be more Meta Knights winning tournaments. Snake takes more time to learn and master, while Meta Knight is just pick up and go. That is why more people play him, and more people do well then him. That doesn't even mean that Meta Knight is better than Snake. I personally believe Snake is superior, but that isn't the relevant topic and I don't expect my opinion to be shared by a majority anyway.

Where did all those Snake players that were winning tournaments go, anyway? Are you saying they all sucked at Snake so they just switched to MK? If Snake is really the superior character, shouldn't at least some of the best have stayed with him when MK started to show up so much, and continued to win tournaments with Snake?

Where are the Snake mains in the tournament standings?

 

[emme]

oh wow... when we in italy did the same poll the effect on smashboards was soooooo different than this

 

[Tyrael64]

Voted to ban. He just dominates the meta-game (haha) so completely that one of the biggest questions to ask when choosing a dedicated tournament main is "how does this character fare against Meta Knight?"

I'm happy with my Lucario main chiefly because he's capable of wrecking anybody in the entire game when it comes down to the wire, but I'm still unhappy that MK has skewed the tiers so badly. Even Melee had at least a handful of top-tiers (Fox, Falco, Shiek, Marth), but now it's just Snake and MK spam everywhere you look. Bad times.

 

[ShaolinAce]

Dan't ban my MK!

 

[Deoxys]

Add in: @ Deoxyes:

Do you reeeeeeeeeeally think he would have that hard of time picking Metaknight back up if he used other characters in competitions for a week or two? If he used someone like Zero Suit Samus, Shiek, Yoshi, or Sonic I could understand your arguement but Metaknight is so easy to use compared to most of the cast and his strategies are so universal that most people could probably drop him for months , pick him back up, and still be amazing with him.

MK is easy to play, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have matchups that require application of knowledge about that matchup. I'm not so sure that what to do at any given point in specific matchups would come back to M2K quickly enough for his performance to be as good. Okay, I went overboard when I said "down the tubes," but it would negatively affect his subconscious understanding of MK's matchups, and would obviously prevent him from getting better at MK.

Dan't ban my MK!

Thanks for sharing.

 

[adumbrodeus]

We know Captain Falcon's matchups, did we learn them because he's used heavily in tournaments?

We most certainly did not.

We learned them because people test with Captain Falcon, trying to find ways to make him work, trying to find ways to just destroy him -- in friendlies, usually.

MK will still be used in friendlies even if he's banned, for fun and to see if the new techniques work against him if nothing else. Why? Because he just is fun to use. He has an additional advantage over CF in that he'll also be played at tournaments that don't choose to follow the MBR's recommendations.

I'm sorry... but friendlies= playing to learn, at least on the level that anything will actually develop.

We're talking about the top level of the metagame, when people don't use friendlies for BS except very rarely. A character that is banned will never see play in that enviroment.

Fox does not have counters. A counter is defined by ratio as a 7:3 advantage. You're stupid if you think any character to date has a 7:3 advantage on Fox. Many credible tournament renown players along with the most comprehensive guide for Fox ever made specifically state that Fox doesn't have any bad match ups at all. Even Marth, who had a CG leading to an FSmash was considered to go even at best. You do not know what you're talking about.

You can't be very good if you think Meta Knight is near impossible to beat. Near impossible is a rather drastic set of odds.

There are 2 types of counters, soft (60-40 to 69-31) and hard (70-30 or better).

In general parlance, having a "counter" refers to either of the 2.

The point is, take it for what the person means, not what you think he should be using the term for.

Are you stupid? M2K is easily the best Smash player in the world right now. He has consistently won tournaments with both Dedede, and Meta Knight. Even against other Meta Knights, he himself dominates most players. He 3 stocked DSF at Hobo11 in less than two minutes. DSF is one of the best players out there. M2K will continue to win tournaments consistently, regardless if Meta Knight remains around. He is not obligated to teach you the obvious, or show you that Meta Knight doesn't need to be banned, simply because you yourself are too ignorant to realize it.

You totally missed his point.

It doesn't matter whose obligation it is to develop a character's metagame. At this point, the best thing the anti-banning crowd can do is develop the metagame of other characters so they can actually compete with MK. This will decrease pro-ban sentiment signifigantly if other characters gain such things.


Regardless, M2K is an outlier. He just proves that if the skill differential is great enough, any match-up is winnable.

If anything, rather than criticizing him, you should be paying attention to what it is he is telling you and the rest of the community, because he is ten times more knowledgeable, experienced, and skilled then you are.

...

Appeal to authority fallacy.

He may be more skilled then the entire rest of the community, but that doesn't mean that he can actually conceptualize well or argue his points well.

Quite frankly he is not the best debator out there, as has been remarked upon by many other Smashbackroomers, and taking his opinion without criticizing it is rather foolish if only for that reason. Really, you should closely examine everyone's opinion before accepting it, because nobody is immune from making mistakes.

This is especially relevant because M2K has a decided conflict of interest, he doesn't wanna lose his MK practice. I'm not saying that this is why he doesn't want MK banned BUT, it does color one's perceptions whether they want it to or not.

 

[salaboB]

This is interesting. Looking over the most recent list of tournament results, I noticed that a middle-ability soft-ban effect almost seems to be in place for MK -- the best MK players are still showing up in the lists as MK (Apparently unwilling to change) but in many smaller tournaments, even ones with only 13 players, there's maybe one MK showing up. Apparently the general population is willing to go back to their favorite character rather than MK, and when the most skilled players in the area do it then MK's ability to win there vanishes.

Now if we could just get the best players to accept a soft ban on him, he could remain tournament legal and just get whipped by the better players when someone who didn't care about being looked down on brought him out.

The thing to understand about playing to win is that violating a soft ban is very similar to cheating a tournament rule -- if it's a proper soft ban, it's there so that a hard ban isn't required but it's acknowledging that without that soft ban the character would be damaging the overall game and would require hard banning. So for all the best players against a soft ban, think about it this way: Would you rather voluntarily choose non-MKs and have no major "He's banned in tournaments" stigma against you when you use him for money matches, or would you prefer to continue smashing everyone's faces just a bit longer until he's officially banned because nobody has a chance against you if they don't use the same character as you're using to fight back?

There aren't that many really good players around, if you all decided to accept a voluntary ban on using him in tournaments you could make it work. Obviously it would just take one refusing it to force the others to all use MK as well (At least at tournies where that one player is present), preserving the current situation and still forcing MK towards bannability.

 

[Ulevo]

The community has presented a rather lengthy (And growing) list of reasons why MK should be banned. Saying "The accuser must provide proof" only serves a point when the accuser hasn't provided proof. There have been many points made encompassing not only matchups but stage viability, tournament usage, tournament attendence, and metagame theory about why MK is bad for Brawl and only going to get worse.

If people want to show that MK isn't worthy of being banned, it's time to step up and start providing tournament results that show he can be opposed. Because all these months of the pro-ban people trying to do that have yielded only a growing number of MKs winning tournaments, players quitting, and more and more options for MK (Not his opponents.) being discovered as he's made to utilize the ridiculous number of options Sakurai gave him in response to the best attempts people have made at taking him down.

That's why challenges are being made to M2K and everyone who's saying other characters than MK can go even in tournaments against MK. Because there are reasons for banning him, and there's precious little evidence opposing them.

So far, the only argument that even remotely holds any ground at all for the pro-ban department is that Meta Knight breaks the counterpicking system. Due to how safe he is from being counter picked, and how easy he is to play, there is little need to worry about being effectively counter picked against by other characters, because even if other characters have an advantage on him, Meta Knight can still win.

That reason alone, considering he doesn't **** the cast, and has mostly 6:4 match ups, with a few 5:5 and a few 4:6, doesn't warrant a ban. Half of the problem with the argument about how Meta Knight breaks the counterpicking system is that no one can really agree on what match up statistics he has. You have people running around saying he loses to Fox, Zelda, Sheik, Yoshi... You have people arguing he wins against the characters that can actually fight him, like DK, Snake, Falco, Diddy... No one knows, or can make up there mind. There are too many opinions, and unfortunately, the Meta Knight board has been very irresponsible on that regard.

Every other reason that has ever been given by pro ban is garbage. I've heard it all. "He wins too much." "His Tornado is too powerful." "All his attacks have no lag." "He can't be gimped." Blah, blah, blah. They're all complaints that can be worked around, and are far from legitimate arguments.

Where did all those Snake players that were winning tournaments go, anyway? Are you saying they all sucked at Snake so they just switched to MK? If Snake is really the superior character, shouldn't at least some of the best have stayed with him when MK started to show up so much, and continued to win tournaments with Snake?

Where are the Snake mains in the tournament standings?

Snakes are still winning tournaments. Last time I checked, he still had the second spot on the tourney rankings. There are just an overwhelming amount more of Meta Knight players then there are Snake players. When you have that many people playing Meta Knight, even if Snake is perfectly capable of winning tournaments, the turn out for results is going to be much less impressive just due to the sheer amount of players using Meta Knight. Not every player that uses Meta Knight will be good enough to win, but that holds true even more so for Snake. Those players that were winning with Snake didn't disappear. They just have to contend with a new wave of players using a character that is much easier to learn. That's just how it is.

 

[PhantomX]

Snake can be made more than manageable via counterpicks... not the case for MK :\

 

[Tero.]

Even if ten thousands of noobs tell me mk should be banned i wouldnt listen to them.
Lets wait for the backroom to decide.